Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

Councillor compares disabled children to deformed lambs watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by marcusfox)
    Wow.

    What a lucid, comprehensive and in-depth analytical rebuttal to my post. I was hoping for more than a one line post, but that's all I have to work with. In any case, what you haven't said is more telling than what you have

    You called me to this debate to see if I would defend myself against your malicious smear tactics and I have responded, yet all you have provided so far are snide and facetious remarks and thinly veiled allusions to certain unpopular opinion in parts of Europe in the mid 20th century. Trolling in other words.

    What we as a nation have become are people who shy away from discussing contentious issues in public because we will be mercillessly attacked by keyboard warriors on student forums like you, or the media, safe in their cocoons, facing no more complex decisions on a day to day basis than whether or not they should have a curry or a bolognaise, in many cases even that decision is made for them, because it's what their parents choose to serve up.

    Dare to express an opinion on immigration? You're a racist bigot. Dare to suggest that benefits should be reformed in order to prevent abuse? You'd rather have the poor in workhouses, and why don't you sterilise them whilst you're at it. Dare to suggest that we shouldn't spend hundreds of thousands per person each year keeping a disabled vegetable alive? You'd be right at home in Nazi Germany.

    Meanwhile in the real world, decisions have to be made on things like healthcare budgets by real people in real life... "Do I spend £250K keeping a disabled vegetable alive for one year with no hope of any sort of quality of life, or do I spend that on five years of £50K cancer drugs in the hope of giving a cancer patient five years of quality existence, or even a possible chance of remission?" Whatever decision you make, you are going to be boned in any case by the keyboard warriors who feel that the wrong decision was made.

    Your opinion on the matter is noticeable only by its absence of any attempt to debate - outlining exactly what your position is on the matter, indeed your lack of any substantiative response apart from an appeal to emotion betrays the fact that you know I have a point, but can't bring yourself to say so.
    Do you honestly consider your posts worthy of a comprehensive and in-depth analytical rebuttal?

    I have not used malicious smear tactics against you, this is a malicious smear in itself. From your posts in the other thread I was interested to know where you would draw the line on discussing lives in the context of affordability. How can it be a smear when you have confirmed you hold these opinions anyway?

    (Original post by marcusfox)
    I fail to see how that is relevant, unless you are seeking to use it as a further weapon to cast negative aspersions on my character.

    Much of what you have already written is simply in order to portray me as some sort of monster, or Untermensch perhaps.

    What if, for example, I were to say I worked in the medical profession? Will you say that I molest my patients under anaesthesia, or that I drink the blood of children? Once you have scapegoated me, you will no doubt wish to place me in some sort of a concentration camp, to prevent me from expressing an opinion.
    Just wondered, as you rightly point out to discuss such extreme opinions publicly can be dangerous.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by n00)
    Do you honestly consider your posts worthy of a comprehensive and in-depth analytical rebuttal?
    You obviously don't, but since I have made the effort, yes, I would like you to point out where you disagree and why.

    I would like to see where you stand on the matter, or is it just a simple 'I feel that people who even consider that we shouldn't spend money on keeping such disabled people alive are scum'?

    I want to know your opinions on the matter. I want you to tell me whether you'd rather spend £250k on one of those cases I mentioned earlier, or on five years of cancer drugs, and why.

    I want to know whether you consider that there are indeed any circumstances when you would consider that it's OK to not spend hundreds of thousands keeping someone alive in a room somewhere, and why that doesn't make you a disgusting human being for feeling that way.

    One of those examples I mentioned earlier will do. No understanding of their
    surroundings, just their own existence, only being able to blink, being kept artificially alive, fed through a tube and having their poop pulled out of their arse by a nurse with a
    hook. Do you keep that person alive, yes or no, and why?

    All questions you have remained conspicuously silent on throughout, all you have been doing is asking the questions and if the respondents responses aren't up to scratch, telling them what disgusting people they are - trolling is what it is.

    How about you answer the questions you have put to other people, in other words...

    (Original post by n00)
    I have not used malicious smear tactics against you, this is a malicious smear in itself. From your posts in the other thread I was interested to know where you would draw the line on discussing lives in the context of affordability. How can it be a smear when you have confirmed you hold these opinions anyway?
    I was referring to you describing it in such crass and indelicate way. I have in no way confirmed I hold such opinions, unless that opinion is simply that the immense cost of lifelong support and care for disabled people must be balanced against the state's other duties - I don't see where this has any sort of equivalency with wishing to euthanise the disabled.

    You have used smear tactics and Nazi allusions against those who don't agree with you - do you remember? #11, #33 and #79.

    I think a particularly illustrative one was post #79 - "So what went wrong the last time we allowed the "adults" to experiment with eugenics?" If that isn't alluding to comparisons to the Nazis, I don't know what is.

    (Original post by n00)
    Just wondered, as you rightly point out to discuss such extreme opinions publicly can be dangerous.
    Just wondered, is that why you refuse to discuss the topic or the points made, apart from sniping here and there? Afraid someone will call you on your beliefs and you might have to justify them?

    I was mocking your attempt to conjure up Nazi associations. You will find that the remarks above are typical of those used to marginalise and target Jews in Hitler's Germany. Surprised that you weren't aware of that.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cake Faced Kid.)
    My mum was born blind, and if her mother had known, would have aborted. She went on to become the first blind physiotherapist in the UK, has total independence, raised two kids, earns a pretty decent amount per year. I am carrying the gene that caused the blindness, and if it transpired that my baby was going to have the condition, I would not abort.

    However I also carry the gene for retinoblastoma (a horrific, aggressive eye cancer, the cause of my dad's blindness), and if tests showed that my partner was a carrier, chances are I wouldn't have kids/would abort.
    That's wonderful, but the fact remains that her life almost certainly would have been a lot easier were she not blind, and that remains true for all blind people.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Steevee)
    That's wonderful, but the fact remains that her life almost certainly would have been a lot easier were she not blind, and that remains true for all blind people.
    Harder yes, but worthy of them not being born? It's hardly total mental and physical retardation
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cake Faced Kid.)
    Harder yes, but worthy of them not being born? It's hardly total mental and physical retardation
    I think you're making the mistake of equating fetus to person. You're not stopping a person being born anymore than you are by wearing a condom or taking a morning after pill. It's a case of simply getting rid of a damaged/malformed fetus in order that a healthy one may take it's place.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Steevee)
    I think you're making the mistake of equating fetus to person. You're not stopping a person being born anymore than you are by wearing a condom or taking a morning after pill. It's a case of simply getting rid of a damaged/malformed fetus in order that a healthy one may take it's place.
    I was more referring in the last comment to the councillors remarks about killing people with disabilities who had already been born. In regard to the 'getting rid of the foetus' side of things, I'm completely in agreement (if the disability would seriously reduce the quality of life, would need round the clock care for life etc)
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cake Faced Kid.)
    I was more referring in the last comment to the councillors remarks about killing people with disabilities who had already been born. In regard to the 'getting rid of the foetus' side of things, I'm completely in agreement (if the disability would seriously reduce the quality of life, would need round the clock care for life etc)
    Yes, that is more problematic morally. Most would say it is not acceptable to 'put down' someone once born.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by marcusfox)
    You have used smear tactics and Nazi allusions against those who don't agree with you - do you remember? #11, #33 and #79.
    #11, No

    #33 In response to another poster bringing up the issue and i think they have a point. I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with a discussion about eugenics, and it certainly doesn't make you a Nazi to discuss it, but when its in a context of affordability I do find that pretty disgusting, when its coming from posters with extreme right wing views when this site seems to be over run with them, then yes the warning signs are there.

    (Original post by marcusfox)
    I think a particularly illustrative one was post #79 - "So what went wrong the last time we allowed the "adults" to experiment with eugenics?" If that isn't alluding to comparisons to the Nazis, I don't know what is.
    #79 :rofl: I doubt thesabbath could care less about Nazi allusions. At least he's honest.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: May 17, 2013
Poll
Are you going to a festival?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.