"Medical exemptions are open to serious abuse and often lead to a nod and a wink approach to abortion."

The existance of guns are open to serious abuse, and often lead to 'accidental' deaths...

Does that mean you think there should be no guns allowed in private ownership?

^^ ooh snap. ICwutUdidthere.

lol. OK. Sorry.

@Orath - So I lied...euthanize me...

Orath - Try to stay on topic here…I know it’s difficult, but we aren’t taking about saving kids and social programs. We are talking about euthanizing kids, and if the excuse “Oh…kid’s deformed…too much of a burden..I don’t want him….off with his head..” then why does the same logic not apply to a child that is consistently delinquent at an early age, regardless of physical disability or lack thereof: “Oh….kid’s a bad egg…mental problems…can’t stay out of trouble…violent tendencies…nobody wants him…can’t be fixed…will be a burden and threat to society….will add no value to anyone’s life (except Bubbe in the shower room)…off with his head…”

At Orathiac the direct answer to your question is yes, with a genuine excemption for farmers and the like. For more info. read the following sentence of my post.

@Orath - I mean, for the pro-abortion crowd you rational is "I don't want it..." and the vacuum cleaner sucks the head off. At least I'm trying to describe a child that is unwanted AND a threat to society. If you support killing unwanted in-womb, then clearly unwanted AND a social threat is sufficient cause to euthanize inner-city youth?

Three strikes rule? Third strike and under 18 and you get euthanized? Interesting thought...

krellin, you did read that it's a voluntary procedure, right?

Seems to me that's a very different thing from executing teenagers against their will.

@krellin, et al:
So, I assume you'd be OK with the higher taxes needed to help support these people with such severe disabilities and depression and who don't want to live any more?

@YJ - Voluntary except in the case of dementia and it isn't far stretch or a slipper slope to allowing parents to euthanize babies or children who can't speak due to extreme young age or mental disability.

@YJ - Voluntary? Yes, because emotionally distraught teens are always the best decision makers.

I’m not sure why we have such a hang-up about teens committing suicide, then – I mean, what’s the big f’ing deal if some stupid teenager doesn’t want to live and takes a whack at the tight-fitting noose routine, right? You know, that awkward kid in school nobody likes, victim of bullying, bad grades, will never amount to anything…why are we so all-fired concerned about teen suicide? Teens are a great judge of life's potential.

And we all *know* that nobody with a severe disability has *ever* amounted to anything in this world…NOBODY…so yes, you are right, YJ, don’t even waste your time with counseling, helping to overcome disability, etc…just off with their heads!

@numbat - Go stroke Orath, will you, instead of playing your childish off-topic games. Either defend the existing topic or don't...but your attempts to change the subject simply indicate you don't have a defense for the topic at hand.

"often lead to a nod and a wink approach to abortion."

You may be talking about other planets, but on earth, this does not exist.

@Numbat - I have no problem with suicide or assisted suicide. I think there should be a court-order requirement so that the person who wishes to die petitions the court, but then they should be allowed to choose the ending of their choice - time, place, and method. I do have a problem with the decision being made for them if they are "unable to make it for themselves". In the case of adults, they could make out a form of living will that states, like a living will, that they would rather be dead than forever trapped in an unresponsive body. But I don't believe in euthanasia for children based on their parents saying "Little Jill has a deformed head and will never amount to anything so lets kill her" when Jill has no ability to say "No! I want to live!" And absent a living will, I believe people should never be actively killed just because they can't shout "No! I want to live!" and haven't left direction via a living will in what should be done should the worst happen. But if an adult legally of age to enter into a contract should wish to commit suicide, it should be as simple as petitioning the courts for a marriage license and just as quick.

@draug: Now you're adding another dimension to the argument. Which is it you are taking issue with, then: the euthanasia itself, or the legal ability of a person with power of attorney to decide what is best for the person under his care?

I don't care for slippery slope arguments. We'll deal with the eventually you suggest when/if it arises. Until then, let's focus on the question at hand.

----

@krellin I have no idea what you're even saying. You do acknowledge that there is a difference though, between euthanizing volunteers and executing people, though, yes?

I take issue with anyone choosing to end another's life. Euthanasia should only be at the future deceased's request. *Never* by power of attorney without explicit statement from the future deceased via a living will.

Let's put it this way, if a infant still in the womb could say "Fuck being born to this bitch, kill me now!" I would support it's right to die. Basically, I support the right to die, but not the right to be murdered.

That's reasonable. Fine by me.

So you're OK with the voluntary ones, then?

Yeah. If you want to off yourself, YJ, go ahead. I'll help if you need it.

Haha thanks for that.

@Draug - I don't disagree with you on most of that except for your 'legal adult' requirement. Why 21, or 18, and not 16, or 14 or even 12? Adulthood by age is rather arbitrary. Anyway, the same kids would quite likely find some other, more gruesome way to commit suicide if a legal route was not available.

BTW: The article doesn't mention euthanizing kids without their permission (i.e., "Little Jill...", as you quoted).

As an aside: if children aged 13 & 14 years can be tried as adults for murder then why can they not decide to end their own lives, especially if parental consent is also required. Not that I agree that kids should be tried as adults for murder but it's often the same people who would have no problem with that argument but are on the opposite side of this argument.

For the same reason you can't get married at 12 or 14 or 16. But, if a juvenile wished to petition the courts, then they could do it as well, same as a juvenile can petition to get married with parental approval or even be emancipated form their parents.

But why 18? Because hormones do shit to those under that age that makes them do stupid shit all the time. And hormone driven depression resulting in a death would be a tragedy.

The "aside" above, was not meant for Draug (who has stated he doesn't mind), but for general consumption.

Oops. I guess it was meant for Draug. You're flip-flipping a bit here aren't you? If a baby in the womb could say "kill me now", you were OK with that. but now not. I'm confused.

And very few 13 or 14 year olds ever get tried for murder even if they commit one. But beyond that, you are equating taking someone else's life and being held responsible for it to taking your own life where you *can't* be held responsible for it? That's just a fucked up analogy.

I said they could still petition the court. I'd trust a baby who could speak making the decision more than a hormone fueled tween or teen.

It's not that bad of an analogy at all. Charging 13 & 14 or even 15 & 16 year olds as adults for murder is saying that they were in their right (adult) mind when they carried out their attacks. If that is reasonable to some people (not me), then those same people should be fine with the same aged kids being treated as adults for the purpose of suicide.

@YJ -- "difference though, between euthanizing volunteers and executing people, though, yes? "

YJ - I comprehend the difference - I'm not an idiot. You do realize that the rationale that people give is these people have no value, they are too sad to live, etc. Lots of people go through depression, I'm not of the opinion that they should be so easily offed for it.

If liberals fought half as hard for troubled pregnancy support to see a mother through pregnancy when she doesn’t want to keep the child – but others would gladly take it (perhaps a lovely gay married couple?), perhaps you wouldn’t so flippantly say, “Ehhhh…mother doesn’t want the dirty fetus…off with it’s head…”

It’s too bad Liberals take such a calloused look at life, and fight so hard, so often to end life…but rarely want to support life.

I have family members and close friends that are both severely mentally retarded – a child abused as a baby with about 30% brain function (adopted by brother in law), as well as a severely emotionally challenged kid (cousin), and a severely deformed kid that is wheel chair bound (boyfriend fiance of niece). It would be easy for these kids (the 2 that can communicate) to get really down one day and say they just don’t want to deal with it anymore. Next week, though, when the mood swing passes, and they are surrounded by a loving family, they are happy to be alive *despite* their struggles.