Should We All Die At 75?
- Thread starter dbphoenix
- Start date
He's right in two more general ways. One, the majority do seem willing to trade their freedom for security. That's an iron rule tradeoff, at least until improving technology lets us have a little bit more of both. Two, populations can and have become enured to such creeping blights, which sadly are only realized to be horrific in hindsight.You can't be serious
But I think we're still a good ways off from Soylent Green.
"They gotta tell people..."
He's right in two more general ways. One, the majority do seem willing to trade their freedom for security. That's an iron rule tradeoff, at least until improving technology lets us have a little bit more of both. Two, populations can and have become enured to such creeping blights, which sadly are only realized to be horrific in hindsight.
But I think we're still a good ways off from Soylent Green.
"They gotta tell people..."
In "more general ways", perhaps. But it has nothing to do with the article.
I underestimated the capacity to find conspiracies everywhere. But it's posted, so there it is.
only troll morons call a reaction to obvious leftist propaganda a conspriacy theory.
lets review.
the op cites... ..
http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2014/09/why-i-hope-to-die-at-75/379329/?src=longreads
by ezekiel emanuel...
emanuel is the virtual doctor death panel in obamacare. .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ezekiel_Emanuel
Death panels[edit]
Betsy McCaughey described Ezekiel Emanuel as a "Deadly Doctor" in a New York Post opinion article.[29] The article, which accused Emanuel of advocating healthcare rationing by age and disability, was quoted from on the floor of the House of Representatives by Representative Michele Bachmann of Minnesota.[30] Sarah Palin cited the Bachmann speech and said that Emanuel's philosophy was "Orwellian" and "downright evil", and tied it to a health care reform end of life counseling provision she claimed would create a "death panel".[10][31][32][33][34][35][36] Emanuel said that Palin's death panel statement was "Orwellian".[37] Palin later said that her death panel remark had been "vindicated" and that the policies of Emanuel are "particularly disturbing" and "shocking".[38] On former Senator Fred Thompson's radio program, McCaughey warned that "the healthcare reform bill would make it mandatory—absolutely require—that every five years people in Medicare have a required counseling session that will tell them how to end their life sooner." She said those sessions would help the elderly learn how to "decline nutrition, how to decline being hydrated, how to go in to hospice care ... all to do what's in society's best interest or in your family's best interest and cut your life short."[39] As The New York Times mentioned,[40]conservative pundits were comparing the Nazi T4 euthanasia program to Obama’s policies as far back as November 2008, calling them "America's T4 program—trivialization of abortion, acceptance of euthanasia, and the normalization of physician assisted suicide."[41]
The nonpartisan Politifact.com Web site described McCaughey's claim as a "ridiculous falsehood."[39][42][43][44] FactCheck.org said, "We agree that Emanuel’s meaning is being twisted. In one article, he was talking about a philosophical trend, and in another, he was writing about how to make the most ethical choices when forced to choose which patients get organ transplants or vaccines when supplies are limited."[45][46] An article on Time.com said that Emanuel "was only addressing extreme cases like organ donation, where there is an absolute scarcity of resources ... 'My quotes were just being taken out of context.'"[10] A decade ago, when many doctors wanted to legalize euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide, Emanuel opposed it.[4] Emanuel said the "death panel" idea is "an outright lie, a complete fabrication. And the paradox, the hypocrisy, the contradiction is that many of the people who are attacking me now supported living wills and consultations with doctors about end-of-life care, before they became against it for political reasons." "I worked pretty hard and against the odds to improve end-of-life care. And so to have that record and that work completely perverted—it's pretty shocking."[47]
Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore., who sponsored the end-of-life provision in H.R. 3200 section 1233, said the measure would block funds for counseling that presents suicide or assisted suicide as an option, and called references to death panels or euthanasia "mind-numbing".[48] Blumenauer said that as recently as April 2008 then-governor Palin supported end-of-life counseling as part of Health Care Decisions Day.[49][50] Palin's office called this comparison "hysterically funny" and "desperate".[49] Republican Senator Johnny Isakson, who co-sponsored a 2007 end-of-life counseling provision, called the euthanasia claim "nuts".[51] Analysts who examined the end-of-life provision Palin cited agreed that it merely authorized Medicare reimbursement for physicians who provide voluntary counseling for advance health care directives (including living wills).[52][53][54][55][56]
lets review.
the op cites... ..
http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2014/09/why-i-hope-to-die-at-75/379329/?src=longreads
by ezekiel emanuel...
emanuel is the virtual doctor death panel in obamacare. .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ezekiel_Emanuel
Death panels[edit]
Betsy McCaughey described Ezekiel Emanuel as a "Deadly Doctor" in a New York Post opinion article.[29] The article, which accused Emanuel of advocating healthcare rationing by age and disability, was quoted from on the floor of the House of Representatives by Representative Michele Bachmann of Minnesota.[30] Sarah Palin cited the Bachmann speech and said that Emanuel's philosophy was "Orwellian" and "downright evil", and tied it to a health care reform end of life counseling provision she claimed would create a "death panel".[10][31][32][33][34][35][36] Emanuel said that Palin's death panel statement was "Orwellian".[37] Palin later said that her death panel remark had been "vindicated" and that the policies of Emanuel are "particularly disturbing" and "shocking".[38] On former Senator Fred Thompson's radio program, McCaughey warned that "the healthcare reform bill would make it mandatory—absolutely require—that every five years people in Medicare have a required counseling session that will tell them how to end their life sooner." She said those sessions would help the elderly learn how to "decline nutrition, how to decline being hydrated, how to go in to hospice care ... all to do what's in society's best interest or in your family's best interest and cut your life short."[39] As The New York Times mentioned,[40]conservative pundits were comparing the Nazi T4 euthanasia program to Obama’s policies as far back as November 2008, calling them "America's T4 program—trivialization of abortion, acceptance of euthanasia, and the normalization of physician assisted suicide."[41]
The nonpartisan Politifact.com Web site described McCaughey's claim as a "ridiculous falsehood."[39][42][43][44] FactCheck.org said, "We agree that Emanuel’s meaning is being twisted. In one article, he was talking about a philosophical trend, and in another, he was writing about how to make the most ethical choices when forced to choose which patients get organ transplants or vaccines when supplies are limited."[45][46] An article on Time.com said that Emanuel "was only addressing extreme cases like organ donation, where there is an absolute scarcity of resources ... 'My quotes were just being taken out of context.'"[10] A decade ago, when many doctors wanted to legalize euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide, Emanuel opposed it.[4] Emanuel said the "death panel" idea is "an outright lie, a complete fabrication. And the paradox, the hypocrisy, the contradiction is that many of the people who are attacking me now supported living wills and consultations with doctors about end-of-life care, before they became against it for political reasons." "I worked pretty hard and against the odds to improve end-of-life care. And so to have that record and that work completely perverted—it's pretty shocking."[47]
Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore., who sponsored the end-of-life provision in H.R. 3200 section 1233, said the measure would block funds for counseling that presents suicide or assisted suicide as an option, and called references to death panels or euthanasia "mind-numbing".[48] Blumenauer said that as recently as April 2008 then-governor Palin supported end-of-life counseling as part of Health Care Decisions Day.[49][50] Palin's office called this comparison "hysterically funny" and "desperate".[49] Republican Senator Johnny Isakson, who co-sponsored a 2007 end-of-life counseling provision, called the euthanasia claim "nuts".[51] Analysts who examined the end-of-life provision Palin cited agreed that it merely authorized Medicare reimbursement for physicians who provide voluntary counseling for advance health care directives (including living wills).[52][53][54][55][56]
None of which has anything to do with the thrust of the article.
You're like AAA: you stumble across a particular word or phrase that triggers your rightist conspiracy rant response. That colors everything else that you read. A Mother Goose rhyme becomes leftist propaganda.
The article is not about death panels. If you don't understand that, I suggest you not think about it anymore.
this is the thrust of the article.
"Even the idea of rationing health care to save money feels offensive or morally wrong to many of us. And the idea of denying medical treatment to a patient based on age or prognosis is not any less controversial. Remember the talk of "death panels" charged with deciding which patients got medical care and which wouldn't? It's scare tactics like this that stymied the conversation decades ago and raised their ugly head again in the recent ACA debate. But as more and more people join the ranks of the elderly every day, this is a conversation that needs to be had.
Daniel Callahan, senior research scholar and president emeritus/co-founder of the Hastings Center -- a research institute dedicated to the study of bioethics -- proposed in his 1986 book "Setting Limits: Medical Goals in an Aging Society" that there be a cap on expensive medical treatments for people at age 80. The author of 17 books recalls how that proposal propelled him to fame -- or perhaps infamy."[/quote]
"Even the idea of rationing health care to save money feels offensive or morally wrong to many of us. And the idea of denying medical treatment to a patient based on age or prognosis is not any less controversial. Remember the talk of "death panels" charged with deciding which patients got medical care and which wouldn't? It's scare tactics like this that stymied the conversation decades ago and raised their ugly head again in the recent ACA debate. But as more and more people join the ranks of the elderly every day, this is a conversation that needs to be had.
Daniel Callahan, senior research scholar and president emeritus/co-founder of the Hastings Center -- a research institute dedicated to the study of bioethics -- proposed in his 1986 book "Setting Limits: Medical Goals in an Aging Society" that there be a cap on expensive medical treatments for people at age 80. The author of 17 books recalls how that proposal propelled him to fame -- or perhaps infamy."[/quote]
The bull shit one or the horse shit one?