ForumsWEPREuthanasia

106 16429
IPwnU2Day
offline
IPwnU2Day
395 posts
Nomad

Euthanasia is the killing of someone with a condition or birth defect or retardation that makes them extremely different from other people. I don't mean skin color or appearance, I mean sever mental or brain problems.

Do you think that the murder of these people is ethical or not? And to whom should it apply?

  • 106 Replies
Green12324
offline
Green12324
4,097 posts
Peasant

Green, either contribute to the topic or don't post at all. If all you are going to do is flame, we don't need you here.


Oh, I can flame if I want to. I'm actually not bad at it. That was simply pointing out how you contradict yourself. It may be a different thread, but that doesn't mean you're a different person.

And a athletics test.


Athletic level isn't determined by genes though. At least not mostly. You can be the fattest person in the world and your kids probably aren't going to have any more of a chance to be fat than the next guy.

why should you not be allowed to live if you are not smart or athletic enough?


He claims that other wise you'll &quotollute the gene pool".
donpiet
offline
donpiet
755 posts
Peasant

You can be the fattest person in the world and your kids probably aren't going to have any more of a chance to be fat than the next guy.


that is not true. your metabolism is determined by your genes. and your metabolism determines how fast your body burns energy.
it defines how much energy you need and how fast you gain weight.
IPwnU2Day
offline
IPwnU2Day
395 posts
Nomad

Which I agree with the Nazis ideal to a certain level


That's sort of what I'm saying. Although I'm not doing this based on race or culture but intelligence. If people read my quotes from Wiki they would see that genetics is a major determinant of intelligence.

Athleticism shouldn't be a factor though. This is because I know that I have a very slow metabolism and yet I am a great athlete and I do 3 sports every year. I can overcome it through hard-work and determination. You can't always pass that on though. Metabolism also isn't really even a main factor in physical fitness, while it can help, it doesn't hinder.

Old people should get to do that if they want to. There isn't anything wrong with that.

I will give it to you this way, and I'm using an example that everyone can understand but you all get what I am saying in terms of intelligence.

Imagine we have one smart generation. Then the next generation isn't as smart. Then the next one isn't. Then the next one isn't. Then the next one isn't. Then everybody is about as smart as a dumb blonde (you knew it was coming).

It takes a few generations, but the passing on of that gene is hindering our ability to evolve as a species.
ligaboy
offline
ligaboy
1,051 posts
Peasant

I'm going to stop arguing with Ipwnu2day because as much as he wants to slaughter unintelligent people by the thousands, it will never happen and no law will ever be passed regarding the euthanasia of people with a low IQ

donpiet
offline
donpiet
755 posts
Peasant

lthough I'm not doing this based on race or culture but intelligence.


the nazis also killed mentally ill and old people, for the same reasons you want to do it.

euthanasia should be really only be allowed for old and terminally ill people, who suffer to much to even slighlty enjoy life.

as for mentally ill or not intelligent people, i do not see the point why they should be killed. they have the right to live and mostly do not suffer so they can lead a good life.
only because someone is different does not make him worse.

and i really doubt there would be much parents to agree to kill a child with disabilietes. they simply love their children the way they are.
Green12324
offline
Green12324
4,097 posts
Peasant

I'm going to stop arguing with Ipwnu2day because as much as he wants to slaughter unintelligent people by the thousands, it will never happen and no law will ever be passed regarding the euthanasia of people with a low IQ


Yup, I gave up too. Can't change his opinion, oh well.

do not see the point why they should be killed. they have the right to live and mostly do not suffer so they can lead a good life.


His argument is that they'll pollute the gene pool otherwise.

Like I've said before, it should only be used when there is no chance what so ever that the baby will live. Especially if they're doomed to die a painful death. It's not our right to decide the fate of someone else other wise.
Talo
offline
Talo
945 posts
Nomad

That was simply pointing out how you contradict yourself. It may be a different thread, but that doesn't mean you're a different person.


I didn't contradict myself. I know it's murder, but I find it a nessasary evil.

I know a family who consists of two Genius level parents. They had 4 children. 2 of them are very intelligent, and the other 2 are lower than adverage. A great tree some times bears bad fruit.
thisisnotanalt
offline
thisisnotanalt
9,821 posts
Farmer

Th purifying of the gene pool has nothing to do with euthanasia. It's eugenics. Killing/not allowing stupid or disabled/'defective' people to reproduce is eugenics, and that's exactly what you're talking about.

Euthanasia should only be applied when staying alive would be very painful, or the patient is terminally ill. Using it to get rid of people who are 'olluting the gene pool' is an inhumane overreaction to something that isn't really a big enough problem to elicit s reaction in the first place.

And euthanasia of ill (not terminally ill, just ill) or underdeveloped infants at/soon after birth is something I can't and won't support no matter how much logic or support is thrown at me.

FryLock19
offline
FryLock19
1,312 posts
Peasant

There is no such thing as necessary evil,unless when dealing with other evil.

Talo
offline
Talo
945 posts
Nomad

Your right, when we kill a terrorist, it's a good thing.

Krizaz
offline
Krizaz
2,399 posts
Nomad

Ray Charles and Stevie Wonder were both blind, but they both showed the world they had great talent on the piano.


Thats not a Mental disorder and they were not in extreme pain, so they're condition was perfectly acceptable.

I personally agree with it, only if the person is in extreme pain with no sign or recovering, or in such a state that he no longer has a conscious and machines are running him, I'd like to move to Oregon someday where this treatment is legal.
Green12324
offline
Green12324
4,097 posts
Peasant

Thats not a Mental disorder and they were not in extreme pain, so they're condition was perfectly acceptable.


It could still be passed along, and according to the OP that is not acceptable.
Krizaz
offline
Krizaz
2,399 posts
Nomad

It could still be passed along, and according to the OP that is not acceptable.


Blindness is not passed along...
Green12324
offline
Green12324
4,097 posts
Peasant

Blindness is not passed along...


It depends. Blindness in some cases is genetical, while of course in other cases it isn't. Obviously if you do something stupid, like pour bleach in your eyes, then it won't be passed along. But if someone is born blind it could be the cause of a genetic disorder, which could have been inherited.
snazzy777
offline
snazzy777
739 posts
Nomad

Everyone has a right to live no matter what disabilities or challenges they have. It is indecent and inhuman to do that. Like previously said in this thread, "it is what separates us from animals."

Showing 61-75 of 106