In article <Pine.SOL.3.91.950225170433.8301A-100000 at corona>,
Patrick O'Neil <patrick at corona> wrote:
>>>On 24 Feb 1995, Brian Rauchfuss - PCD wrote:
>>>> If significant life-extension is available but is denied, is this really
>> different from mass-murder? Would it not be better, at least to offer
>> people the choice between reproduction and life-extension (note that 2 or
>> less children per couple does not create an exponential population problem).
>>No it would not be murder. No one has a "right" to life extension any
>more than they have a right to transplant organs. When doctors withold
>treatment for a patient for varied or sundry reasons, it is cannot be
>considered murder. Since when did you or I have an inalienable right to
>chemotherapy....
Patrick,,, words fail me. ....move your head from side to side
very, very, very slowly. Otherwise the 'bong, bong, bong' of
your brain rattling about will deafen you.
Have you ever been sick (not mentally, you've already clarified
that)? Have you ever needed a doctor for a life theatening
condition? If you ever get that sick, are you going to refuse
treatment because you don't have 'a right' to it?
You remind me of a guy I went to college with, Vietnam era. He
hated draft resistors, until he lost his IIS (student) deferment.
Then he discovered more important things to do than go into the army.
Just like when the doctor says you have six months left, then you'll
demand a transplant 'because it's your right.'
--
rha
