Please help me argue an important point

Log in / Sign Up

List of Forums + New Post Recipe Box Usergroups Following My Posts Bookmarks

Private Messages Advanced Search Rules New User Guide FAQ Advertise Contact Us

Forum -> Chinuch, Education & Schooling

Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next

View latest: 24h 48h 72h

amother

Hotpink

Mon, Jun 18 2018, 6:38 pm

amother wrote:

Op, the viewpoint you want to argue sounds like the viewpoint of Hitler. Not so?

I guess you are right.

Sad

amother

Hotpink

Mon, Jun 18 2018, 6:39 pm

What if I change the question slightly

"why should I give my hard earned cash to help a troublesome person like that?"

amother

Hotpink

Mon, Jun 18 2018, 6:42 pm

ILOVELIFE wrote:

Just jumping in to say that in the US if anyone can prove they were terminated due to a disability or medical diagnosis, they can sue for a whole lot

Not that sort of terminated.

Sad

Mommyg8

Mon, Jun 18 2018, 6:51 pm

So, I don't know if this person is religious or not, but these are the arguments both ways:

If he/she is religious, you can explain that the reason for handicapped people is that they are a lesson for the rest of us. Also, they give us an opportunity to give chesed, which gives us more zechusim...

Even if the person is not religious, the argument can go like this - 1. different people can have different strengths, some of which are not apparent on the surface. For example, someone may be weak physically, but can have tremendous potential in other areas (someone mentioned Stephen Hawkings, while he is an outlier, there are many like him on a lesser level). So if someone were to go around killing all the weak people, for example, how do they know that they won't kill someone with tremendous potential? (So let all the others live for the sake of that one special person).

2. If we would go around killing those that have some kind of deficiency, who's to say that the person asking that question won't ever get that kind of deficiency? For example, let's say you want to kill someone who's quadriplegic - who's to say that the person asking won't get into an accident one day - does he/she want to be killed then? If he is not useful to society? Sort of like "mah disaneh lach al ta'aseh l'chavercha", or, if he's not religious - Kant's "The ethical imperative". If we go around killing all those that we think are useless, who's to say that won't happen to us?

3. Even if he's not frum, doesn't that person see that it is wrong to kill someone on ethical grounds? Isn't there some kind of basic moral code that says "thou shalt not kill"?

And of course, as frum people, we know that G-d has a plan for all of us, even those who seemingly don't have much use... we don't understand everything in this world... and we trust that G-d has a plan.

cnc

Mon, Jun 18 2018, 6:55 pm

amother wrote:

Can you actually name any person, group, or organization that currently holds by this? I think at some point we can't try to convince every crazy person out there. There are people who believe that elvis is alive and he is actually the rav in my shul. Should I bother convincing these people otherwise? It gives them credibility to acknowledge their view. Fortunately, they are in the smallest of minorities and can be disregarded and ignored.

Read any medical ethics book( I would start naming them, but I don't have time to start digging them up now) or take any class in medical ethics. It is discussed and debated.

I think that fortunately we live in a society/culture where we would consider the other viewpoint the minority and the crazies. But there are cultures where this ugly POV is considered mainstream:(

amother

Natural

Mon, Jun 18 2018, 7:00 pm

amother wrote:

"why is it I crazy? No one wants them. They are always causing problems. Why not just get rid of them?"

Sad

a hitler yemach shemo was big on this hateful concept. Seriously, yidden?

amother

Apricot

Mon, Jun 18 2018, 7:10 pm

amother wrote:

What if I change the question slightly

"why should I give my hard earned cash to help a troublesome person like that?"

so the question has switched from the general to the specific?

because that troublesome person's life has the same value as the person who is asking the question.

amother

Hotpink

Mon, Jun 18 2018, 7:14 pm

amother wrote:

a hitler yemach shemo was big on this hateful concept. Seriously, yidden?

"don't pull the Hitler card. It has nothing to do with it. I'm talking about autistic children who cause so many problems in the classroom and many do terrible things as adults. At the very least they will always be sponging off society, never quite able to fit in or contribute."

Sad

ssspectacular

Mon, Jun 18 2018, 7:16 pm

This is horrifying. A person's life has value ALWAYS because Hashem is keeping him alive. Proof-we are allowed to be mechallel Shabbos for a sick person. Killing a sick person is murder just like killing a healthy person. We don't decide who is worthy of life. Hashem does.

Laiya

Mon, Jun 18 2018, 7:17 pm

SixOfWands wrote:

Helen Keller

FDR (dude was in a wheelchair)

Stevie Wonder

Ray Charles

Marlee Matlin

Ralph Braun

... and mental illness:

Sylvia Plath

Beethoven

Abraham Lincoln

Winston Churchill

Buzz Aldrin

Pat Conroy

Nikola Tesla

Ernest Hemingway

To name a few.

I agree that physical or mental disabilities do not need to limit a person, or prevent them from contributing to society. I am particularly sensitive to the plight of disabled people.

But if I'm understanding the OP correctly, the person she is arguing with is asserting that a person is only valuable so long as they are contributing to society. Examples of disabled people who nevertheless contributed to society, then, wouldn't defeat the premise.

For that matter, OP, the argument could be extended so as to include the elderly or infirm too, no? And anyone suffering from a traumatic brain injury, unable to work and collecting disability, etc.

I don't think this is an argument that can be won with logic. People who have been influenced by Judeo-christian beliefs feel that life has innate value.

As soon as you try to make the argument that respecting the value inherent in human life is good for society, too, you have stepped away from that belief; which is that we value life regardless of whether or not valuing life is good for society.

amother

Apricot

Mon, Jun 18 2018, 7:20 pm

amother wrote:

what terrible things?

amother

Pewter

Mon, Jun 18 2018, 7:20 pm

amother wrote:

not true.
Think Temple Grandin for example. we have her to thank for the way mass Shechita is run.

Laiya

Mon, Jun 18 2018, 7:23 pm

amother wrote:

The person has to be logically consistent in order for it to make sense to have any type of conversation. What is their criteria for measuring the value of a person's life?

PinkFridge

Mon, Jun 18 2018, 7:27 pm

Squishy wrote:

Stephen Hawking

I would never have ever imagined myself liking those two words. But I did. "Like" them, that is.

PinkFridge

Mon, Jun 18 2018, 7:29 pm

ILOVELIFE wrote:

Just jumping in to say that in the US if anyone can prove they were terminated due to a disability or medical diagnosis, they can sue for a whole lot

I could parse this sentence, but I won't Wink

ETA: I was thinking of a different type of termination.

Say, did Peter Singer and Stephen Hawking ever meet?

Laiya

Mon, Jun 18 2018, 7:57 pm

amother wrote:

Not that sort of terminated.

Sad

I actually recently saw this article about Amazonian tribes in Brazil, and their practice of killing children who are disabled, twins, or just don't fit in. Not just infanticide; older kids, too. Today. Still going on.

What's this person's view on that?

http://foreignpolicy.com/2018/.....cide/

penguin

Mon, Jun 18 2018, 7:59 pm

Because compassion is what distinguishes one type of society from another.

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

chicco

Mon, Jun 18 2018, 8:07 pm

1. The premise that such individuals drain more than they offer is false.

2. Who are we to decide who is providing/draining?

3. What about all of the "healthy" people who contribute absolutely nothing to society?

4. Just because someone is disabled in one area, doesn't make him or her worthless.

5. G-d puts everyone here for a reason. What right do we have to deem someone less than? Yes, I known I said that one already, but I feel it is worth repeating.

6. Honeslty, someone with the attitude you are describing is someone that society could do without, IMNSHO.

Miri7

Mon, Jun 18 2018, 8:08 pm

If someone told me they thought people with autism should be terminated upon diagnosis, I don’t think I’d keep talking to them. She’s advocating murder when someone becomes inconvenient.

This person you’re arguing against is not worth your breath.

amother

Hotpink

Mon, Jun 18 2018, 8:08 pm

penguin wrote:

"this applies to me as well. "

Page 2 of 5

Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next