So I suppose it's hypothetically possible that not forcing people suffer through end-state cancer might end up with Nazi death camps, despite Canada not being Nazi Germany.
I'm sorry, you must be reading something different than what the rest of us are. Would you mind sharing?
Oh and BTW, the article summery even exposes that " It does not limit physician-assisted death to those suffering a terminal illness." And it should be noted that Nazi Germany was actually held in high regard at one time before it wasn't. It was the pinnacle of progressiveness. Free education, health care, the rejection of god and all that good stuff. It wasn't until they invaded other countries and started killing all kinds of people that we changed out minds. Hell, even the US was a staunch supporter of the modern scientific theories of the time like Eugenics. We didn't exactly kill anyone but we took their reproductive rights away and in some cases removed them from society altogether. California and North Carolina were bastions of Eugenic reality. Hell, aspects of it are still practiced in the USA today with the Margret Sanger legacy. There are reasons why Planned Parenthood will only put abortion clinics in areas with a high minority population. But lets ignore reality for a while.
So, the rational response would seem to be to allow assisted suicide under certain conditions and be careful to not vote anyone who starts making noises about ubermenschen.
Again, where are you reading this limitation to terminally ill people? It is not what the court ruled, it is specifically identified as not so in the article and summery.
Besides, what right do you have to lord it over other people's life and death, to either end them or force them to go on?
I don't have that right. well, unless I'm the designated next of kin with decision making authority. However, I and society does have a right to stop others from purposely and intentionally ending the life of others for any reason that does not preserve the life of someone else. This is what this is about after all, doctor assisted- or in other words, someone else either doing so or helping to kill someone else with or without a terminal illness.
Either you are ignoring pertinent details or have some super secret document that says something different then what was presented to the rest of the world. Please share it with us either way.
I do not remember singling jews out at all. I do remember pointing to a progression that went to killing jews though. I'm not sure why you are so upset over the truth though. Perhaps it's just a sign of why this is important to know (all of it).
Including doctor assisted suicide. I guess it is better for society as a whole as someone will not be dispatched to clean the splattered guts of someone jumping from an overpass right when a speeding semi truck is rushing towards them. It might be easier than cleaning brains and blood off some things.
You cannot deny the option to kill themselves is not there to be considered as this is what the ruling is about. You even went through the motions in your original post "It's got to be better than forcing people to continue to live an unbearable life." They will know that people ridicule them behind their backs, that some people pretending to be nice to their face will always think they are freaks of nature. I would think that is pretty unbearable for some- in fact, I know it is because we see them committing suicide. We even see adults pretending to be kids on the internet who end up causing or being the driving force behind other kids to commit suicide. But now, a doc can make that so much easier.
You should read some history then. Mercy killings set the groundwork for the final solution. It started by a father begging for the government to end the life of his crippled boy arguing about how shitty the quality wouls be and how dignified he could die. It ended up with the government killing anyone it didn't like. You may know its end better by the term holocaust.
But hey, that will never happen again right? Especially if we make ourselves so ignorant of the past that we do not know it happened before.
Its rather simple, all we have to do is look at history and allow it to repeate.
Do you not think this has ever happened before and this special flower is unique to or times? Dignity, quality of life, it is not anything new. It has all been used before in the same capacity- ending someone else' life. Except now that siucidal gay teen or the boy who thinks he is a girl doesn't have to kill themselves when they are tormented for not fitting into society- they can get a doctor to do it for them.
It would be a slippery slope fallacy only if it never happened in the past. Its like saying the concept of lowering the drinking age and relaxing the druck driving laws will result in more alcahol related fatalities in accidents is a slippery slope fallacy.
That's right. And we can bring back the T4 program and end all the suffering we see fit. With enough controls, it will bever morph into death camps for the politically undesirables. But at least the murderers can berate someone into wanting to die because they are defective in some way like being homosexual or transgender or diseased in some way. It will be more humane and give them a chance ay dignity.
And much, much, much more than that can be seen from political gamesmanship. It's the rich who will have to relocate or somehow do something about their ocean front property. It's the rich who will lose all their land values in NYC and so on because of flooding concerns. Very few poor people own land there, they do however live in buildings owned by the rich.
So 150 million people could not build dikes and levies like the Dutch has in the span of 1 or 2 centuries?
If not, I'm not sure they count- survival of the fittest and evolution wise and all. I mean seriously, do you think the dutch do not know how to manage rising sea water?
The hasn't been any updates in the news lately but rumor has it that he became a scientist and politician in canida and has sued some newspaper for libel.
Lol.. so much history revisionism in your post that it is no wonder there are deniers.
The established science of the time took the IQ of the jews into consideration already. Eugenics took a lot of other factors into consideration too.
Galileo was not persecuted because he disagreed with the bible, he was persecuted because he made personal insults against the pope and church leaders when the correctly told him he could not present his theories as fact without more evidence. And as we know, his theories needed more work and were not completely accurate. Nothing in the Bible precludes Galileo's theories.
But hey, facts are not important when claiming to push facts right? I mean anything to exagerate your set of facts does nothing to diminish their importance right?
Its interesting that you brouht up costs and how it would effect geographical areas. The current so called solutions will do the same too. The difference is largely the timescale involved. We either see the change over a generation or two and watch the rich lose some land or we take action right now to ptotect the mega corporate farms and the rich's land holding and see the costs increase in a decade of less.
One of those scenarios- hmm. Never mind. We can just get government to magically take care of all the poorer people by taxing the rich and when there are no more rich left, we will have successivly replace freedom and everyone will do what the government says. Its worked out so well in the past so it will be fine in the future.
It kind of sucks reaching at Rush Limbaugh, but he has declared there is no journalism in the media any more. It is all media narrative reports from media narrative reporters.
Interesting thought though. Even if people do not like the source.
39. In addressing the difficult interpretation issues posed by the conflicting positions, we start by observing that the 1996 Act effected landmark changes in a variety of areas of communications policy. We recognize that the interpretation presented by Senator Stevens would serve the goal of eliminating distinctions that result in different regulatory treatment for firms that arguably provide similar functionalities based on whether firms provide "telecommunications" or "information services." We find, however, that in defining "telecommunications" and "information services," Congress built upon the MFJ and the Commission's prior deregulatory actions in Computer II. After careful consideration of the statutory language and its legislative history, we affirm our prior findings that the categories of "telecommunications service" and "information service" in the 1996 Act are mutually exclusive. 77 Under this interpretation, an entity offering a simple, transparent transmission path, without the capability of providing enhanced functionality, offers âoetelecommunications.â By contrast, when an entity offers transmission incorporating the âoecapability for generating, acquiring, storing, transforming, processing, retrieving, utilizing, or making available information,â it does not offer telecommunications. Rather, it offers an "information service" even though it uses telecommunications to do so. We believe that this reading of the statute is most consistent with the 1996 Act's text, its legislative history, and its procompetitive, deregulatory goals.
And
45. In addition, in considering the statutory history of the 1996 Act, we note that at the time the statute was enacted, the Computer II framework had been in place for sixteen years. Under that framework, a broad variety of enhanced services were free from regulatory oversight, and enhanced services saw exponential growth. 95 Accordingly, a decision by Congress to overturn Computer II, and subject those services to regulatory constraints by creating an expanded "telecommunications service" category incorporating enhanced services, would have effected a major change in the regulatory treatment of those services. While we would have implemented such a major change if Congress had required it, our review leads us to conclude that the legislative history does not demonstrate an intent by Congress to do so. 96 As a result, looking at the statute and the legislative history as a whole, we conclude that Congress intended the 1996 Act to maintain the Computer II framework.
IT gives a pretty competent and detailed analysis of why congress never intended the internet to be regulated as a common carrier. The law would need to be changed in order to change the status and have it survive a court ruling.
Violence of WWII solved the violence of Germany. Violence of a lot of things have solved the violence problem of others. It's really a matter of what will it take. You see, at some point in time, the good guys will decide it's enough and go back to being non-violent. The bad guys will either join them in defeat or die trying to avoid it. Well, that is if the good guys win which may not always be the case.
Farmers are historically bigoted on their equiptment. Its a matter of differences and dificulty in changing impliments. They won't just switch out because of the amount of relearning, differences in operationing, and costs of changing or replacing their attachments.
Mega commercial farms may be different. But the farmer with less than 1000 acres will trend this way. One of my neighbors still mows and rakes hay with a tractor from 1968 because of this. He uses a different tractor to bail becaise the bailer broke and he found one for his planter tractor (mid 90's) at a better price that was faster than fixing the older one.
I've seen this on heavy equiptment as well as other things. Usually, dusconecting the sendor altogether gets around the problem but sometimes it can create other issues. For instance, a coolant level sensor will shut the engine off if it reports both to much or to little coolant but disconecting it altogether will just throw a check engine light. An intake manifold pressure sensor can shut the enginr off too. Disconecting it will derate the power, stop the turbo from working and pretty much stop you from doing much of snything other than driving out of the field. A PTO sensor can do similat things but also cause impliments to not function corectly i had a planter that wouldn't allow the electronics to operatr the row size because it couldn't tell the PTO was on. It also derated the power of the engine.
But its worse than that. Each injector has a programable ID and a profile that needs loaded into the ECM if replaced or rven swapped to another cylinder on some of the engines (cat ) and you need a special program with factory passwords. This is big money either way you go. Either a service call with a technician or about 10 grand for a program and dongle and a subscription to a website that will generate a password bases on engine identifyers that change.
I'm not going to knock windows as for all it's faults, it has been easy enough to use that any idiot can own a computer.
That said, i have met these idiots personally. I caught one walking around trying to plug an RJ45 into every phone outlet (RJ11) he could find. He thought it was the network.he was trying to connect his laptp to the network because it had several virus' and he wanted the company anti virus to remove them. I caught another trying to disable the firewall. Someone in a chat room gave her a program that "would make her job easier" but it wouldn't run. It just popped up a screen and closed it quickly So she connected back to the chat room and he was trying to remote in. She said "oh, its ok, i've known him for 3 months in this chat room now and he's always doing things with computers".
Trucks already report mileage driven in each state and they either establish an average mpg by industty average for the type of use or default to 4.7 mpg.
This is according to IFTA regulation and if they do not drive out of any state then the state will have its own program.
They perform audits periodically to enforce these rules. It will be compared to industry averages and if you lack documentatiion to support a deviation from yhe norm, they will asses a default rate.
Government, kings and so on are just proxies for your ability to keep land or property. Without it, you would protect your land bu ypurself using whatever means you can.
As for copyright, its the same thing. Without government protection, you would have to do it yourself. It doesn't matter what kind of life experience or whatever was put into it.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sorry, you must be reading something different than what the rest of us are. Would you mind sharing?
Oh and BTW, the article summery even exposes that " It does not limit physician-assisted death to those suffering a terminal illness." And it should be noted that Nazi Germany was actually held in high regard at one time before it wasn't. It was the pinnacle of progressiveness. Free education, health care, the rejection of god and all that good stuff. It wasn't until they invaded other countries and started killing all kinds of people that we changed out minds. Hell, even the US was a staunch supporter of the modern scientific theories of the time like Eugenics. We didn't exactly kill anyone but we took their reproductive rights away and in some cases removed them from society altogether. California and North Carolina were bastions of Eugenic reality. Hell, aspects of it are still practiced in the USA today with the Margret Sanger legacy. There are reasons why Planned Parenthood will only put abortion clinics in areas with a high minority population. But lets ignore reality for a while.
Again, where are you reading this limitation to terminally ill people? It is not what the court ruled, it is specifically identified as not so in the article and summery.
I don't have that right. well, unless I'm the designated next of kin with decision making authority. However, I and society does have a right to stop others from purposely and intentionally ending the life of others for any reason that does not preserve the life of someone else. This is what this is about after all, doctor assisted- or in other words, someone else either doing so or helping to kill someone else with or without a terminal illness.
Either you are ignoring pertinent details or have some super secret document that says something different then what was presented to the rest of the world. Please share it with us either way.
Hate much?
I do not remember singling jews out at all. I do remember pointing to a progression that went to killing jews though. I'm not sure why you are so upset over the truth though. Perhaps it's just a sign of why this is important to know (all of it).
Including doctor assisted suicide. I guess it is better for society as a whole as someone will not be dispatched to clean the splattered guts of someone jumping from an overpass right when a speeding semi truck is rushing towards them. It might be easier than cleaning brains and blood off some things.
You cannot deny the option to kill themselves is not there to be considered as this is what the ruling is about. You even went through the motions in your original post "It's got to be better than forcing people to continue to live an unbearable life." They will know that people ridicule them behind their backs, that some people pretending to be nice to their face will always think they are freaks of nature. I would think that is pretty unbearable for some- in fact, I know it is because we see them committing suicide. We even see adults pretending to be kids on the internet who end up causing or being the driving force behind other kids to commit suicide. But now, a doc can make that so much easier.
I'm not missing anything. May as in might does not equal always and you will never know if the doctor is a die hard fundy, a goreific sociopath.
This may even be especially true in situations where a government entity is directing the doctors actions.
You should read some history then. Mercy killings set the groundwork for the final solution. It started by a father begging for the government to end the life of his crippled boy arguing about how shitty the quality wouls be and how dignified he could die. It ended up with the government killing anyone it didn't like. You may know its end better by the term holocaust.
But hey, that will never happen again right? Especially if we make ourselves so ignorant of the past that we do not know it happened before.
Its rather simple, all we have to do is look at history and allow it to repeate.
Do you not think this has ever happened before and this special flower is unique to or times? Dignity, quality of life, it is not anything new. It has all been used before in the same capacity- ending someone else' life. Except now that siucidal gay teen or the boy who thinks he is a girl doesn't have to kill themselves when they are tormented for not fitting into society- they can get a doctor to do it for them.
It would be a slippery slope fallacy only if it never happened in the past. Its like saying the concept of lowering the drinking age and relaxing the druck driving laws will result in more alcahol related fatalities in accidents is a slippery slope fallacy.
That's right. And we can bring back the T4 program and end all the suffering we see fit. With enough controls, it will bever morph into death camps for the politically undesirables. But at least the murderers can berate someone into wanting to die because they are defective in some way like being homosexual or transgender or diseased in some way. It will be more humane and give them a chance ay dignity.
Nah.. this administrationand science departments will just clsim it is global warming andvdemand some new powers.
And much, much, much more than that can be seen from political gamesmanship. It's the rich who will have to relocate or somehow do something about their ocean front property. It's the rich who will lose all their land values in NYC and so on because of flooding concerns. Very few poor people own land there, they do however live in buildings owned by the rich.
Just make sure they understand it was the beta site.
So 150 million people could not build dikes and levies like the Dutch has in the span of 1 or 2 centuries?
If not, I'm not sure they count- survival of the fittest and evolution wise and all. I mean seriously, do you think the dutch do not know how to manage rising sea water?
The hasn't been any updates in the news lately but rumor has it that he became a scientist and politician in canida and has sued some newspaper for libel.
Lol.. so much history revisionism in your post that it is no wonder there are deniers.
The established science of the time took the IQ of the jews into consideration already. Eugenics took a lot of other factors into consideration too.
Galileo was not persecuted because he disagreed with the bible, he was persecuted because he made personal insults against the pope and church leaders when the correctly told him he could not present his theories as fact without more evidence. And as we know, his theories needed more work and were not completely accurate. Nothing in the Bible precludes Galileo's theories.
But hey, facts are not important when claiming to push facts right? I mean anything to exagerate your set of facts does nothing to diminish their importance right?
Its interesting that you brouht up costs and how it would effect geographical areas. The current so called solutions will do the same too. The difference is largely the timescale involved. We either see the change over a generation or two and watch the rich lose some land or we take action right now to ptotect the mega corporate farms and the rich's land holding and see the costs increase in a decade of less.
One of those scenarios- hmm. Never mind. We can just get government to magically take care of all the poorer people by taxing the rich and when there are no more rich left, we will have successivly replace freedom and everyone will do what the government says. Its worked out so well in the past so it will be fine in the future.
But he did not choose to allow a company to profit from his name and likeness.
It kind of sucks reaching at Rush Limbaugh, but he has declared there is no journalism in the media any more. It is all media narrative reports from media narrative reporters.
Interesting thought though. Even if people do not like the source.
No, it will not change the application of the law. Sorry for such a late response. Here is the doc I was referencing (PDF warning)
They specifically state things like
And
IT gives a pretty competent and detailed analysis of why congress never intended the internet to be regulated as a common carrier. The law would need to be changed in order to change the status and have it survive a court ruling.
Yes, yes it has.
Violence of WWII solved the violence of Germany. Violence of a lot of things have solved the violence problem of others. It's really a matter of what will it take. You see, at some point in time, the good guys will decide it's enough and go back to being non-violent. The bad guys will either join them in defeat or die trying to avoid it. Well, that is if the good guys win which may not always be the case.
You mean like it was before 9/11.
Farmers are historically bigoted on their equiptment. Its a matter of differences and dificulty in changing impliments. They won't just switch out because of the amount of relearning, differences in operationing, and costs of changing or replacing their attachments.
Mega commercial farms may be different. But the farmer with less than 1000 acres will trend this way. One of my neighbors still mows and rakes hay with a tractor from 1968 because of this. He uses a different tractor to bail becaise the bailer broke and he found one for his planter tractor (mid 90's) at a better price that was faster than fixing the older one.
I've seen this on heavy equiptment as well as other things. Usually, dusconecting the sendor altogether gets around the problem but sometimes it can create other issues. For instance, a coolant level sensor will shut the engine off if it reports both to much or to little coolant but disconecting it altogether will just throw a check engine light. An intake manifold pressure sensor can shut the enginr off too. Disconecting it will derate the power, stop the turbo from working and pretty much stop you from doing much of snything other than driving out of the field. A PTO sensor can do similat things but also cause impliments to not function corectly i had a planter that wouldn't allow the electronics to operatr the row size because it couldn't tell the PTO was on. It also derated the power of the engine.
But its worse than that. Each injector has a programable ID and a profile that needs loaded into the ECM if replaced or rven swapped to another cylinder on some of the engines (cat ) and you need a special program with factory passwords. This is big money either way you go. Either a service call with a technician or about 10 grand for a program and dongle and a subscription to a website that will generate a password bases on engine identifyers that change.
But i put it in the shoe box with all the other important stuff. It was lost when our house was robbed or caught fire last month.
A lot of things happen to a lot of people. Its not always their stupidity.
I'm not going to knock windows as for all it's faults, it has been easy enough to use that any idiot can own a computer.
That said, i have met these idiots personally. I caught one walking around trying to plug an RJ45 into every phone outlet (RJ11) he could find. He thought it was the network.he was trying to connect his laptp to the network because it had several virus' and he wanted the company anti virus to remove them. I caught another trying to disable the firewall. Someone in a chat room gave her a program that "would make her job easier" but it wouldn't run. It just popped up a screen and closed it quickly So she connected back to the chat room and he was trying to remote in. She said "oh, its ok, i've known him for 3 months in this chat room now and he's always doing things with computers".
Trucks already report mileage driven in each state and they either establish an average mpg by industty average for the type of use or default to 4.7 mpg.
This is according to IFTA regulation and if they do not drive out of any state then the state will have its own program.
They perform audits periodically to enforce these rules. It will be compared to industry averages and if you lack documentatiion to support a deviation from yhe norm, they will asses a default rate.
Government, kings and so on are just proxies for your ability to keep land or property. Without it, you would protect your land bu ypurself using whatever means you can.
As for copyright, its the same thing. Without government protection, you would have to do it yourself. It doesn't matter what kind of life experience or whatever was put into it.