Jump to content
IGNORED

Rick Santorum has no clue about the Netherlands


latraviata

Recommended Posts

There does seem to be a sort of 'survivor'....Stephen Hawkings. Were I in his shoes, would I want to be alive? Hard to say since I am not a genius.

Stephen Hawking's ALS is still progressing and will kill him eventually, it's just a rare case of it taking much longer than expected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it really 10% of the death rate, though??

And have you seen those bracelets?

NO I have never seen the bracelets and I don't wear one!

I doubt it, euthanasia is very complicated, active or passive, morphine, mortification, suicide.

Not every case will be reported, but I am sure for registered 'active euthanasia' cases, 10% of the death rate is ridiculous.

in addition:

Real statistics, among the 1.4% of deaths per year in the Netherlands is euthanasia. 100% voluntary or stop unbearable suffering. (80% is cancer patient).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

So after seeing this on Daily Show this week I searched to make sure I didn't create a new post that had already been made (yay for newbie reading rules)...and I'm glad to see you guys caught this serious bit of bullshit. How does he get away with saying this stuff?

Since it's relevant, and hilarious (in a sad, frustrating way), here is a video clip of one of Santorum's spokespeople responding to a Dutch reporter's questions about the statements on euthanasia and the Netherlands. Try not to throw anything at your computer screen.

Edited because I fail at links.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So after seeing this on Daily Show this week I searched to make sure I didn't create a new post that had already been made (yay for newbie reading rules)...and I'm glad to see you guys caught this serious bit of bullshit. How does he get away with saying this stuff?

Since it's relevant, and hilarious (in a sad, frustrating way), here is a video clip of one of Santorum's spokespeople responding to a Dutch reporter's questions about the statements on euthanasia and the Netherlands. Try not to throw anything at your computer screen.

Edited because I fail at links.

Wow, that sure is aggressive-making...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So after seeing this on Daily Show this week I searched to make sure I didn't create a new post that had already been made (yay for newbie reading rules)...and I'm glad to see you guys caught this serious bit of bullshit. How does he get away with saying this stuff?

Since it's relevant, and hilarious (in a sad, frustrating way), here is a video clip of one of Santorum's spokespeople responding to a Dutch reporter's questions about the statements on euthanasia and the Netherlands. Try not to throw anything at your computer screen.

Edited because I fail at links.

Is that the one where Santorum's spokesperson says that the truth is not important, only what is in Santorum's heart?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is that the one where Santorum's spokesperson says that the truth is not important, only what is in Santorum's heart?

Yeah. It boils down to:

Reporter: "His facts are wrong...my country was misrepresented...wtf?"

Spokesperson: "He speaks from his heart and he's strong pro-life"

Reporter: "I get that, but he's wrong about the facts"

Spokesperson: "He's strong pro-life"

Reporter: "Yes, but his facts are all wrong"

Spokesperson: "He's really strong pro-life"

:angry-banghead:

It seems the reporter gives up at that point. I kind of wish he hadn't but at the same time...he must have been completely dumbfounded by the complete ignorance and inability of this spokesperson to answer his question or even acknowledge it and just didn't see the point in trying anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nether lands?

I'm sure it just sounds like a very naughty place to Ricky, seeing as he's dimwitted and sexually repressed in equal parts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ha, I'm from Belgium, and I totally agree. Euthanasia is legal here and I am glad it is, but it's a totally voluntary decision that has to be supported by MULTIPLE doctors and there are very specific regulations. Who are we to tell a mortally sick person that he/she can't end his/her own life instead of having to suffer even more? And if it's well-regulated (and it is), what's the problem? And if Santorum doesn't think European old people "dare" to go to the hospital when they're ill, well, he's clearly never been over here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nether lands?

I'm sure it just sounds like a very naughty place to Ricky, seeing as he's dimwitted and sexually repressed in equal parts.

"Evidently Santorum's comments about the Netherlands were yanked from his nether-parts"

-Stephen Colbert

I apparently saw this on the Colbert Report, not the Daily Show. The clip is worth watching if you haven't seen it and enjoy the show.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-ncV8qE5Y4

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reporter: "His facts are wrong...my country was misrepresented...wtf?"

Spokesperson: "He speaks from his heart and he's strong pro-life"

Reporter: "I get that, but he's wrong about the facts"

Spokesperson: "He's strong pro-life"

Reporter: "Yes, but his facts are all wrong"

Spokesperson: "He's really strong pro-life"

Colbert's piece latched on to the reporter saying, "A lot of these things, it matters what's in his heart" in reply to the reporter asking her why Santorum had lied. All day today Colbert has been tweeting lies about Santorum followed by the hashtag #inmyheart, which is exactly what he did on Twitter with the #NotIntendedToBeAFactualStatement hashtag when Jon Kyl lied about Planned Parenthood and his rep used that excuse. His first was "Rick Santorum has body hair in the exact shape of his sweater vest. #inmyheart".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Evidently Santorum's comments about the Netherlands were yanked from his nether-parts"

-Stephen Colbert

I apparently saw this on the Colbert Report, not the Daily Show. The clip is worth watching if you haven't seen it and enjoy the show.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-ncV8qE5Y4

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ha, I'm from Belgium, and I totally agree. Euthanasia is legal here and I am glad it is, but it's a totally voluntary decision that has to be supported by MULTIPLE doctors and there are very specific regulations. Who are we to tell a mortally sick person that he/she can't end his/her own life instead of having to suffer even more? And if it's well-regulated (and it is), what's the problem? And if Santorum doesn't think European old people "dare" to go to the hospital when they're ill, well, he's clearly never been over here.

Yes, it is grosso modo the same legislation, we were first though.... ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This. I could never understand why it's considered humane to euthanize a cat or dog that is sick and in pain with no hope of recovery but considered a horrible evil thing to do if the victim is human.

It's all religious in nature. The whole reason that euthanasia isn't legal is because religious people think that human beings have souls, and that those souls belong to their deity. They don't think that humans actually have the right to own our bodies or to make decisions about when we stop living. That's why euthanasia and suicide are both considered such big sins. Our lives don't belong to us; they belong to their god.

Whereas animals, even beloved pets, are considered less than human beings. They don't believe that animals have souls. On the contrary, they believe their god gave us dominion over the animal kingdom, so animals are like property, to be bought, sold, traded, and killed as humans wish. That's why euthanizing Fluffy is okay, but euthanizing Grandma isn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sometimes I get the feeling that certain religious people think that suffering is good for people. Those that are adamantly opposed to euthanasia are also likely to be against giving high doses of pain killers to terminally ill patients. It's almost like they want to them to suffer. I don't get it. If you won't allow someone to end their life a few months early, why not at least let them have all the narcotic painkillers that it takes to ease their pain? One of the things I don't like about Mother Theresa is her stance against giving enough pain medication.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First of all, why the hell does Frothy cares what goes on in my birth country. Second off all, it's roughly 2% of all deaths that are the result of euthanasia. Third of all those bracelets don't exist. Fourth of all, if he's willing to lie about this, what else will he lie about if God forbids he becomes President? Fifth of all, fact checking, it's really not that hard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Latraviata, I not only resent having this loon as a countryman, I don't even like belonging to the same SPECIES as him.

don't worry about that:

you: homo sapiens

frothy: homo stupidus

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Latraviata, I not only resent having this loon as a countryman, I don't even like belonging to the same SPECIES as him.

I am not really certain he is human....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's all religious in nature. The whole reason that euthanasia isn't legal is because religious people think that human beings have souls, and that those souls belong to their deity. They don't think that humans actually have the right to own our bodies or to make decisions about when we stop living. That's why euthanasia and suicide are both considered such big sins. Our lives don't belong to us; they belong to their god.

Whereas animals, even beloved pets, are considered less than human beings. They don't believe that animals have souls. On the contrary, they believe their god gave us dominion over the animal kingdom, so animals are like property, to be bought, sold, traded, and killed as humans wish. That's why euthanizing Fluffy is okay, but euthanizing Grandma isn't.

This

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is slightly off topic but I read about the Maraachli baby on wikipedia. That poor family. First the older sister dies at 18 months of age because of a rare disorder. Then mom is diagnosed with Lupus and dad quits his job to take care of her. Then their son also comes down with multiple horrible conditions and dies.

This reminds me of a frum family I met once. One son had a condition that didn't allow him to eat anything and he had to survive on a feeding tube (and he was destined for brain damage from this). Another son obviously had some serious ADHD and Aspbergers, although was bright. Another daughter was going through chemo and the fourth daughter was perfectly healthy and well adjusted.

They were a home school family out of necessity. I think the son with Aspbergers went to public school to a special program and then to a part time religious program. The daughter on chemo was being home-schooled and the healthy daughter who was just one year younger stayed to be home schooled to keep her sister company. The thing is that they were obviously not having more kids after this, but they were hit with all these issues simultaneously. I cannot imagine finding out that your newborn baby is sick, then shortly afterwards have your other son develop symptoms of Aspbergers with a cancer diagnosis of your oldest child.

Even though Santorum has a sick child he also has a ton of money and great insurance. Not to mention it is his wife who cares for the child, not him. And they have half a dozen perfectly healthy children who can help out too. He has no clue what its like to have your family cursed with disease and the poverty that comes with it. Yet, he thinks he can dictate to the rest of us how we should live and end our lives when the worst of the worst happens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That being said, after reading about the Maraachli family I think that they had the right to extend their son's life. The doctors really should have respected their wishes more. I don't know how they could have done it and still saved the child from the pain. Its really such a hard call. I often think about the babies born with just their brain stem (so they can feel pain and breathe but nothing else) and wonder how their parents can keep them alive for long periods of time. Then again, I can sympathize with waiting for a child and being so hopeful and having your hopes completely dashed. You want to hold on to something and it might be irrational, but love isn't always rational. There is a part of me that says that the parents should be allowed to have the time wtih their babies, and that it might help them come to terms with it. But, there should be a time limit to indulging the parents.... who should decide this is another question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When my FIL was in hospice and actively dying, he starting bleeding from every orifice. My MIL wanted him transported to the ER. The hospice nurses had to practically physically bar her from making that happen. Thankfully, for his sake, he passed pretty quickly after that.

On Homesteading Today, there was a guy who was a caretaker for a woman who kept insisting that the insurance companies were trying to kill off the woman who was obviously dying. He actually managed to override hospice once and have her taken to the hospital. He was VERY pissed off with hospice too. She did eventually die, but I do wonder how much more pain he put her through insisting that she should get all treatments possible. (search for the threads about "Alma" if you want more information)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Um, yea I'm pretty sure we could fill several large memory banks with all the things Santorum has no clue about.

The fact that this waste of space has won so many primaries is extremely disturbing :S

And what the heck is wrong with euthanasia? If I'm dying and there's nothing anyone can do to save me, I would much rather choose my way of death than have to just sit there and suffer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This

Thinking on it some more, this is the same recurring theme with religious arguments against not only euthanasia and suicide, but also contraception, abortion, and the death penalty. Even when it's a cause I agree with (such as being against the death penalty), a god's ownership of the human body and/or "soul" has nothing to do with my objection. Whereas religious people who vehemently protest against the death penalty feel that only their god has the right to decide who lives or dies. It's not the killing they disagree with; it's who's doing the killing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.