Yet one can still have an abortion.
If you agree with the family you're retarded. Plain and simple.
Its fairly well known in med ethics that if a parent denies life saving treatment all you need is a court order to resume. The kind of lymphoma she has is very treatable with proper chemo, she'll die without it.
As for the alternative treatments they are referencing? Ask Steve Jobs, he will tell you about their effectiveness.
Are adults allowed to refuse treatment?
Why can guardians not share the same privilege? If we don't let them make that choice, does this precedent declare that children are owned by the State?
I'm sure the National Inquirer runs factual articles too. What would you say to me if I started posting National Inquirer articles to prove my point? Exactly.
yea and why not? they're aborting a bunch of cells, nothing more. they have the potential to become more but they won't. just like the sperm i shoot into some cleenex
I don't want to take this thread in the wrong direction, but you are watering down the fact that many abortions are not done at this stage, but much later. Good try on attempting to block an image of a baby in your mind.
So why not just suffocate, shoot, or drown their daughter? The end result will be the same as their refusing medical treatment for leukemia.
I don't want to take this thread in the wrong direction, but you are watering down the fact that many abortions are not done at this stage, but much later. Good try on attempting to block an image of a baby in your mind.
to be honest, i don't care either way. i don't have kids and don't want any. am also quite desensitised to pretty much everything (surprises myself at times). especially considering that people don't consider kids truly self aware until they're around 5. until that point they're animals basically.
IIRC, children usually become self aware between 2 and 3 years. The study for this is fairly simple: hold a mirror in front of a child. If the child realizes it is himself in the reflection, they are self aware. A child certainly realizes this before age 5, for what its worth.
Another part of the story is that another child in the community had this same leukemia a while ago, and the group did opt for chemo. And that child died a horrible painful death.
Also, we anabapists don't believe in charity or in medical insurance. So all of this is being paid for in cash. Everyone in the community puts in some money towards the total bill. Including me.
The decision of what treatment to persue isn't up to the immediate family. It's made by the entire community.
I find it interesting that Incorruptible supports France's decision to ban burkas - "those radical Muslims" - but finds it to be a governmental intrusion here to *not allow parents to let their child die of a treatable illness.
edit: *not
Chemo treatment is never guaranteed to beat cancer, but it is a good chance against it. You think this child won't die in agony while her family watches? While he/she is not being treated for symptoms of Leukemia? Its not a cold....this is cancer of the blood cells.
I doubt the child died a "horrible painful death" as there are medications that can be given to make the patient comfortable...unless of course, your parent's are religious nuts who refuse the treatment. My grandmother died horribly from Pancreatic cancer in 2008, she was not in horrible pain until she told the doctors that she wanted to go home and refused further treatment. She made it 3 days. She's been fighting it for 4 years.
What are you on the internet? Why do you have a computer? I thought the amish were against technology that interferes with their culture?
Also, I don't mean to attack you...but I distinctly remember you saying you were on Disability in OT. You don't believe in charity or medical insurance but you can take SS? How does that work?
If you are the wrong person who said that, forgive me....but I am fairly certain that it was you.
You've also said several times in OT that you've gotten treatments in hospitals for your condition. How is it fair then that you can get treatment but an amish child is not allowed some sort of relief from their condition?
That seems a bit hypocritical, no? Modern Medicine can improve your quality of life but not a child's?
No you are right.
I grew up in a strict Mennonite community but I left that when I went to college. I don't agree with their teachings. I do keep in touch with them because they're my family. One of my older brothers, the currentElder of our community mailed me a letter about the hershberger's. They don't use the internet but in an emergency I can get a phone message to them through one of their non-Mennonite neighbors who has a phone.
When I went out into the real world I dealt with a lot of things such as work, taxes, and so on. I paid into SS, it'd be silly not to take advantage of it.
I've always paid all of my own and my family's medical bills. And when I ran my own businesses, I always paid medical insurance for all of my employees. That's the way it seems to work out here.
It's not always easy to blend the world of my family and the world out here. Sometimes I make mistakes.
Very sorry to hear about your grandmother with pancreatic cancer. Cancer sucks.
Seems like a sensible and rational approach. What is your thoughts on the proliferation of Amish and Mennonite reality shows? Are they viewed by the other communities as good or bad on the whole? Thanks.
How about you two idiots actually contribute something useful? A quick Google search shows that this is true. Anarchist was right and you two were wrong.
thank you:thumbsup: