this also has implications to the chicken growing farmers, who supply cheap eggs and meat to urban populations.
so far our outbreak hasn't spread to humans, and the gov't has killed hundreds of thousands of birds.
it's not the money (the parents have raised the money for treatment).
Judges in the case have acknowledged that the case highlights differences in law and medicine – and an American willingness to try anything, however unlikely the possibility of success – but have held that prolonging the infant’s life would be inhumane and unreasonable.
Ah yes: Dignity at all costs, never mind the alternatives are available.
Arturito has a similar mitochondrial depletion syndrome to Charlie and was the first person in the United States to receive the experimental and pioneering nucleoside therapy. It’s the same therapy Charlie’s parents, Connie Yates and Chris Gard, are fighting for their son to receive. Yesterday, a High Court judge agreed with doctors at Great Ormond St Hospital that Charlie should not have the treatment and should be allowed to “die with dignity
Thus, government officials and doctors are defending tiny Charlie's right to choose death over suffering through further medical treatments? Did I read that right? That appears to be the bottom line, in mainstream news reports about the case.
Now, if journalists are open to digging deeper into the religious elements of this case, I would recommend them reading a First Things essay by conservative Wesley J. Smith, author of "Culture of Death: The Age of 'Do Harm' Medicine."
Katharine’s charities outstripped her considerable fortune, especially after the introduction of the federal income tax, which at one point was gobbling up a third of her income. In a move that would be hard to imagine with today’s Alternative Minimum Tax, Congress in 1924 passed a bill providing that any person who had given at least 90 percent of their income to charity for the preceding 10 years would be exempt from federal taxes. The bill was widely understood to include no one but Katharine Drexel.
Nah, most of those massacred horribly were merely defenseless Peruvian peasants and don't count, whereas the woman was a liberal who believed in the revolution, (so she is a heroine?)Her parole sparked anger in Peru, still reeling from its 20-year conflict which ended in 2000 after some 70,000 lives were lost. Headlines across the country labeled her a “terrorist.”
Ghost in the article: Havel was secular, and the revolution didn't start in his country, but in Poland, spurred on by a pesky bishop who built a church in the Marxist paradise of Nowo Huta and backed Solidarity...which is why the story tends to be ignored.“Living within the truth,” according to Havel, is an inherently moral enterprise. It requires sacrifice, which presupposes a “sense of responsibility” for others — a belief in love, friendship and compassion. In the company of John Paul II and Alexander Solzhenitsyn, Havel believed that political renewal starts in moral and personal renewal. In one letter from prison he wrote, “But who should begin? Who should break this vicious circle? The only possible place to begin is with myself. . . . Whether all is really lost or not depends entirely on whether or not I am lost.”
Yeah, they want the government to do it all so they aren't burdened...If you don't see where this is going, you haven't been paying attention.
Why did we fight so hard for sexual liberation, birth control and abortion rights, new models of childbirth, respect in the workplace and child care — only to become demure good girls in middle and old age?