ViperOverLord wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:However, anyone who thinks evolution did not happen is someone who lacks the skills and awareness (both) necessary to be president.
That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Its called
The Theory Of Evolution, because it's only theory. Also, you basically are saying that anyone that is Christian (at least the many that believe in creationism) lacks skills and awareness to be president. Do you have any clue how f'ing stupid that sounds?
Funny, but you know, when Christ came he said "he who believes in me ..., along with
this, above all else I tell you ''.. "love thy God and love thy neighbor as thyself".
NO WHERE in that does he say "believe the Earth was created in 6000 years or you go to hell. And, no, it was not a set matter even then. However, science and investigation had not advanced to the point of firming a set age for Earth. Most scholars of the day stated simply "we do not know". If pressed, they might, much as early scientists did, put forward times in the thougsands, times that seemed very, very long back then, but which had not pretense of being truly accuarate.
MOST Christians do not accept young earth Creationism, because most Christians have had a real education, not the home-schooling "deny reality" that so much of fundamentlist groups try to perpetuate. REAL truth stands against all, it does not need to hide or decieve.
Evolution is no longer "just a theory". Animals change over time and become other species. That is not theory, it is fact. Furhtermore denying that fossils represent a real and true record, that geology took a very, very long time to occur means ignoring most of biology, geology, physics and a good deal of chemistry.
There IS no proof, none at all to support young Earth theories. Even most of what is put forward by the "flagship" of Creation "Science"', the Institute for Creation Research, and Dr Morris' other cronies, puts forward pure outright lies, misstatements and fruad.
ViperOverLord wrote: PLAYER57832 wrote:And any party that champions "death panels" as if they were something cruel and inhumane, instead of an honest Hospice-style attempt to make end of life decisions more human and easier... is just abusing rhetoric to meet their ends.
Death panels are cruel and inhumane.
You don't even know of what you speak on this! All you know is the internet distortions that turned a real and true issue into some kind of demand for euthanasia. The so-called "death panels" were NOT about killing people, they were about recognizing that sometimes people do die and denying that makes for WORSE healthcare, not better.
The fact is that our current system is what is cruel. Someone can be days away from dying, with absolutely NO hope, and they will still be subjected to invasive and painful tests and procedures that will not prolong the person's life OR quality in any way. It's just how the "system" works. Only with hospice do doctors have any chance of saying "hey, its time to stop thinking we can have a cure and instead work on comfort. The sad truth is, the end is near and its time get your family toghether and say goodbye... we will stay with you until the end".
And no, "relieving pain" does NOT mean euthanasia. But, here is the thing, If I have a 9 year old in a car wreck, with potential brain injury and multiple other issues, I will order life flight. If, however, that person is a 90 year old on the way to cancer treatment, I almost certainly won't. It has nothing to do with being "hard hearted" or uncaring, it has to do with the fact that I know that 90 year old is fragile, is unlikely to survive regardless and that the best thing to do is give them what comfort we can, hope they survive enough for family to get to the hospital, etc. BUT, here is the thing, if that person is in the hospital, and undergoes a surgery that fails, with similar outcomes, the 90 year old would likely be subjected to the exact same procedures as the 9 year old, with only a few exceptions. That is because death, allowing death is simply not an option in most medical venues. There are exceptions, there are hospitals that deal with not just the life end of life fully, but also understand that death happens and that how it happens is just as important as how life happens.
ViperOverLord wrote: And does not the DOI say that we believe in the pursuit of life? Or are those just words on paper? And if someone has the means to battle for their life then why should they be systemically denied the care that they want b/c some a-hole bureaucrat has said that there life is not valuable enough. You should try living in America lady. You might enjoy it.
You need to understand what you are criticizing, and really talk to people who have dealt with this.
The truth is that God doesn't just allow death, death is a part of who we are. It was not God that dictated humans should be hooked up to machines, in constant pain, long after there is any hope of any real life. In many cases, the procedures doctors are forced to do under many systems actually shorten lives, they don't increase them. However, because doctors are trained to solely look at "do whatever you can to give a person a possible few more days.." OR, worse, even just "I have a procedure and I want to try it". I can tell you of many times when my elderly, very cogent grandmother had to undergo procedures that did nothing but give the doctor the assurance he was less likely to be sued. Not, my grandmother, an old army nurse, was a battle-ax. Further, as a former nurse, she even knew some of the "correct words" (medically) to use. Even so, her wishes were NOT always followed.
The real crime here is a whole group of people who seem to think they ought to be immortal up until God suddenly drops down and grabs them up. A nice vision, but not reality. The reality is much more like what happened with my family members... a very slow, but steady decline, followed by bouts of increased discomfort and pain NOT particularly helped by the hospitals and doctors who cared for them once we got to the point of "the end". Luckily, we do have hospice, so many things were halted. Even so, just as an example, my father-in-law, comotose, with only minimal brain activity, but some apparent sensation, had to be strung up to multiple IV's, etc, etc and given full, intensive "care" up until a hospice bed was available. In that hospital, just being designated hospice wasn't enough. To be treated as a true hospice patient, you had to be in that room. THAT is the kind if idiocy these end of life panels were to have investigated.
And, yes, at some point, you do have to do something called "triage" and decide whether the limited resources of insurance, of hospital staff, etc are better spend prolonging the death of a 90 year old or even 70 year who is "ready" to go, or if those funds are better spent on a neonatal care, surgary for young accident victims, etc.
See, that is the part so many of you like to pretend is not real. Resources in medicine ARE limited. Right now, you can pretend that these decisions are not being made becuase insurance company bureaucrats make them. These panels were to go and look at the real and true outcomes, the science, the monetary costs (yes, nasty but a reality that has to be considered), the physical limitations (in regards to machines, doctors,etc.) and set forth guidelins and reccomendations. Almost certainly, that would be a set of choices.
