Shock Vid: Mother Wants the Right to Euthanize ‘Severely Disabled’ Children — And ‘90%’ of Dr. Phil’s Audience Agrees

  • Thread starter Thread starter SwizzleStick
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I’d like to think that this was a small, uneducated group that doesn’t represent the majority - but since joining CAF I realize that I (and really everyone I know) are not anywhere near as smart as older generations. The older people on here seem able to critically think, logically analyze and articulate things that I think and feel but would have no idea where to start in defense of these things. They have NO idea how much I respect their wisdom and wish I could know just one person who could think like that…I honestly get sad at the thought of the world being without them.
Hey, hey, not all the younger people on here are uneducated and unable to think critically :p.

sw85 said it in another thread and I think it’s worth paraphrasing here: “We have turned from a culture of the “primacy of the intellect”, which discerns universal goods, to a culture of the “primacy of the will” which thinks to invent its own goods.” That is, we have turned from a culture where you sit down and think about things, about what is right and just, and turned into a culture simply that wills something to be right or wrong. I think that is especially true here. The mother presumes that she knows what’s best for her disabled child, even though she has no indication about whether the child is suffering or what her child would want. She fails to realize that line of thinking: children with cerebal palsy can be euthanized because we presume that they must be suffering terribly, the elderly with dimentia can be euthanize because they appear to be suffering, by our standards, etc.

Though I will agree with you to some extent. Many of those in the younger generation (though certainly not all, or perhaps even a majority) seem to just accept and will things to be correct. For instance, I know my college roommate accepts abortion, and while I don’t know whether or not he has thought thoroughly about it, seems to be just accepting abortion as a forgone conclusion.
 
What sort of people do you think have nothing better to do with their time than to attend daytime TV programs? Do you think they have a total collective I.Q. of 100? Think again. 🤷
I wouldn’t presume to know, and I think it’s a bit uncharitable to make such statements, but it doesn’t matter either way, because I.Q. is irrelevant to morality.

I know people who can barely spell their own names who possess a higher standard of ethics than plenty of PhD.s. On the other hand, I have known many people whose I.Q.s were probably in the 130s or above who were completely misanthropic nihilists and sadists.

There are plenty of highly intelligent people who lack any demonstrable sense of compassion or human dignity, and there are just as many people with little to no education who are shining examples of love and charity.

Let’s stick to what we do know about these people: they are morally bankrupt. Calling them stupid might make us feel better, but, besides being an unwarranted insult, it doesn’t change anything. And your generalization of the attendant audience seems a bit naive, as I would assume, as most of these shows are taped in cities with heavy tourist traffic, that most of the audience consists of people on vacation, etc. You speak of them as if they’re some roving band of mentally impaired cultists who follow Jerry and Maury around like mindless groupies. The sad reality is that they could be your neighbors.
 
I hope you are correct, that it is not a representative sampling of American views. I was shocked that 90% thought euthanasia would be an acceptable route. But, I don’t know anything about Dr. Phil, so maybe his audience is comprised of similar creatures to those who appear on Springer.
Doesn’t Obama hold a similar position?
 
I’m speechless… I wanted to comment on this, but words escape me…
I can help with some words.

Terrible. Awful. Disgusting. Reprehensible. Abhorrent. Abominable. Appalling. Offensive. Dreadful. Evil. Foul. Hideous. Horrendous. Horrible. Horrid. Loathsome. Obscene. Odious. Repugnant. Repulsive. Revolting. Shocking. Sickening.
 
Blog entry regarding the situation.

"The Most Disturbing Thing You’ll See Today

A guest on Dr. Phil has severely disabled adult children, and she wants the right to be able to euthanize them. A mother of disabled children in the audience is rightly appalled by this, since it’s cold-blooded murder. Dr. Phil asks his audience for a show of hands for all those who think a mother should be allowed to kill her children. What happens next will chill you to your core (the video is in the link: I couldn’t embed it): about 90% of the audience agrees with her.

The mother from the audience (the one who chooses life over death) is so stunned she can only say “Oh my God.” I feel for her. It’s like she is suddenly given the ability to see into the souls of everyone around her, only to realize that she almost alone in a sea of monsters.

Sometimes I think we’re so far gone we’ll never come back. We’ve lost our way. Modern medicine and technology has insulated us from the realities of the human experience of suffering so much that we are incapable of facing adversity, or of even seeing Christ in the face of the last and the least. When even mothers believe they can kill their children in good conscience, and an average audience supports that idea, we’re all in deep trouble."…

Source link: patheos.com/blogs/godandthemachine/2012/05/the-most-disturbing-thing-youll-see-today/
And this is the monstrous thinking that is known as “Modernism”.
 
Doesn’t Obama hold a similar position?
No. He does not hold a similar position on life. He holds the exact position. He holds the position that an infant born alive during an attempted abortion should not be given medical aid, but be left to die instead.
 
No. He does not hold a similar position on life. He holds the exact position. He holds the position that an infant born alive during an attempted abortion should not be given medical aid, but be left to die instead.
Not quite. The thread is about severely disabled already born children, not about children who are the victims of abortion.
 
Not quite. The thread is about severely disabled already born children, not about children who are the victims of abortion.
Yes. That is why I edited my post. It still isn’t quite right, but it is improved to convey my thought process.

I should try to type in Word, edit and all that, before I post. But, that probably is not going to happen, though, because I word edit and edit and edit and never get anything posted. 😃
 
I won’t disagree with your characterization. 🙂
Well, of course you won’t, because it was a caricature based on the caricature you had already painted. 😛 My actual characterization of the audience was of average people, attending a TV show taping just as part of a vacation or something of the like… just something fun to do. If your image were realistic, I should expect to see most of the same people in the audience of every episode, and I just don’t think that’s the case.
I think you have that right. 🙂
So do I. Which is why I’m worried. The statement “they could be your neighbor” implies that they are indeed a group of average people; not some lunatic fringe.
 
What sort of people do you think have nothing better to do with their time than to attend daytime TV programs? Do you think they have a total collective I.Q. of 100? Think again. 🤷
I’m lucky enough to be able to go home every day for lunch, and I tune in to some TV every so often. Sure is a different demographic being catered to, I must say! I weep for this country.
 
Well, of course you won’t, because it was a caricature based on the caricature you had already painted. 😛 My actual characterization of the audience was of average people, attending a TV show taping just as part of a vacation or something of the like… just something fun to do. If your image were realistic, I should expect to see most of the same people in the audience of every episode, and I just don’t think that’s the case.

So do I. Which is why I’m worried. The statement “they could be your neighbor” implies that they are indeed a group of average people; not some lunatic fringe.
And Qui est ce (Christine) wonders why I think Conservatives are humorless. 🤷
 
And Qui est ce (Christine) wonders why I think Conservatives are humorless. 🤷
I thought the post below was pretty funny and I’m pretty conservative, for what that is worth
You speak of them as if they’re some roving band of mentally impaired cultists who follow Jerry and Maury around like mindless groupies.
I won’t disagree with your characterization. 🙂
The sad reality is that they could be your neighbors.
I think you have that right. 🙂
Link to actual post #26 here because I can’t seem to get the quoting correct: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=9254448&postcount=26.
 
And Qui est ce (Christine) wonders why I think Conservatives are humorless. 🤷
Alright, Rich, fess up. Are you really Sister Cleo?

How did you know I was a registered Republican!? Oh wait… I forgot. I’m not.

But you are right… I absolutely despise humor. For entertainment, I only watch those really depressing French “art” films. My idea of a good time is reading “Atlas Shrugged” while listening to Johnny Cash’s rendition of “Hurt” on repeat. And, in fact, I even insist that no one smile in my presence. Ever. And if they do, I start reciting Sartre until they go away.
 
Alright, Rich, fess up. Are you really Sister Cleo?

How did you know I was a registered Republican!? Oh wait… I forgot. I’m not.

But you are right… I absolutely despise humor. For entertainment, I only watch those really depressing French “art” films. My idea of a good time is reading “Atlas Shrugged” for the 100th time. In fact, I even insist that no one smile in my presence. Ever. And if they do, I start reciting Sartre until they go away.
That’s sarcasm, not humor. But, okay if that’s your style.
 
That’s sarcasm, not humor. But, okay if that’s your style.
Well, there is such a thing as sarcastic humor. And since you were attacking my character, it seemed like the only appropriate response. 🤷 I know some great knock-knock jokes, too, though!

Oh, and what exactly would you call this?
Rich Olszewski:
What sort of people do you think have nothing better to do with their time than to attend daytime TV programs? Do you think they have a total collective I.Q. of 100? Think again.
I would wager that that’s a bit more biting and hostile than anything I said.
 
Well, there is such a thing as sarcastic humor. And since you were attacking my character, it seemed like the only appropriate response.
Being either humorless or a barrel of laughs doesn’t go to anyone’s character. The meanest person can be the life of the party and the kindest can be wholly devoid of a sense of humor. Most of us tend to be somewhere in-between.
I know some great knock-knock jokes, too, though.
I’ve heard them all - I have an 11 year-old grandson. 😉
 
Being either humorless or a barrel of laughs doesn’t go to anyone’s character. The meanest person can be the life of the party and the kindest can be wholly devoid of a sense of humor. Most of us tend to be somewhere in-between.
Very true, but I don’t appreciate being called humorless. It makes me think of people just like I described. Laughter is an essential part of my life, but after watching that clip, you’ll forgive me if my sense of humor was temporarily sapped.
I’ve heard them all - I have an 11 year-old grandson. 😉
Hmm… tough crowd.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top