FACT-MAN-2 wrote:

cjoe1994 wrote:I have nothing against disabled people, but if someone can't work and has no one to work for them, why is their life so important? How is it fair that money is wasted on people who aren't particularly useful for much at all when money could easily be spent to save productive and important people and improve their quality of life?

Why not just humanely kill/"murder" them?

I've seen some dumb questions asked in this forum, but this one absolutely takes the cake.

I entirely agree with this sentiment.

Fucking dumb.

Let's not forget the retired members of society - they contribute nothing either. In fact, the retired are just a positive drain on the financial and social resources of everybody else. So we should raise the retirement age, or even do away with it altogether, and as soon as somebody retires and is no longer "important" enough to live then cart them off to the Soylent Green plant for processing.

THWOTH wrote:Let's not forget the retired members of society - they contribute nothing either. In fact, the retired are just a positive drain on the financial and social resources of everybody else. So we should raise the retirement age, or even do away with it altogether, and as soon as somebody retires and is no longer "important" enough to live then cart them off to the Soylent Green plant for processing.

I disagree. You can always have the "Oma für's Grobe", as we say here. (Our grannie for the rough work).

Regina wrote:

THWOTH wrote:Let's not forget the retired members of society - they contribute nothing either. In fact, the retired are just a positive drain on the financial and social resources of everybody else. So we should raise the retirement age, or even do away with it altogether, and as soon as somebody retires and is no longer "important" enough to live then cart them off to the Soylent Green plant for processing.

I disagree. You can always have the "Oma für's Grobe", as we say here. (Our grannie for the rough work).

Yeah Reggie, but once their hands are gnarled with arthritis and they can no longer soften leather with their teeth we really should leave them out on the ice to die - or at least release them into the wild to fend for themselves.

THWOTH wrote:

Regina wrote:

THWOTH wrote:Let's not forget the retired members of society - they contribute nothing either. In fact, the retired are just a positive drain on the financial and social resources of everybody else. So we should raise the retirement age, or even do away with it altogether, and as soon as somebody retires and is no longer "important" enough to live then cart them off to the Soylent Green plant for processing.

I disagree. You can always have the "Oma für's Grobe", as we say here. (Our grannie for the rough work).

Yeah Reggie, but once their hands are gnarled with arthritis and they can no longer soften leather with their teeth we really should leave them out on the ice to die - or at least release them into the wild to fend for themselves.

The latter, I suppose, what with all the global warming and stuff.
Also, I can see how euthanasia helps the environment: fewer people, fewer environmental problems.

THWOTH wrote:

Regina wrote:

THWOTH wrote:Let's not forget the retired members of society - they contribute nothing either. In fact, the retired are just a positive drain on the financial and social resources of everybody else. So we should raise the retirement age, or even do away with it altogether, and as soon as somebody retires and is no longer "important" enough to live then cart them off to the Soylent Green plant for processing.

I disagree. You can always have the "Oma für's Grobe", as we say here. (Our grannie for the rough work).

Yeah Reggie, but once their hands are gnarled with arthritis and they can no longer soften leather with their teeth we really should leave them out on the ice to die - or at least release them into the wild to fend for themselves.

But.., but only if they aren't grandparents.

I read once that grandparents have an important role for parenting the parents of newborns. (sorry, no sources)

cjoe1994 wrote:... [The disabled] won't need to be killed if a charity supports them.

What about the State adopting a charitable approach towards supporting the less able members of society?

After all, the democratic ideal is that (irrespective of whoever is in power) the State is administered on behalf of, and for the benefit and well-being of, all citizens equally. In effect then, what you suggest is that the unproductive disabled person should not be afforded the rights and protections of citizenship; that citizenship is granted, or one qualifies for citizenship, as a function of one's ability to work.

In this case, the more productive members of society should really have a greater say in how things are done than the less productive members. Now, all we have to do is define what 'productive' means and categorise each employment position accordingly.

However, under this regime are the wealthy to be considered more productive than the working poor, and therefore deserving of more influence and say, even if they sit on their backsides all day eating chocolates. Should we not also be culling the unproductive idle rich along with the disabled?

Why are these stupid ideas allowed to propagate on our forum?

NineOneFour wrote:Why are these stupid ideas allowed to propagate on our forum?

Shhh! Keep talking like that and you might find yourself on the train to the Soylant Green plant.

NineOneFour wrote:Why are these stupid ideas allowed to propagate on our forum?

It is the xmas holidays. Goes to the head. Like booze.

smudge wrote:

THWOTH wrote:
Who will draw up the criteria and head the panel?

Hmm....I see a new role for myself...

A new career for 2012....

For a start, all those under 6ft tall to be considered 'disabled and surplus to requirements' on grounds they cannot reach top shelves in supermarkets.
All those unable to sufficiently appreciate my good looks to be considered 'disabled, irredeemably flawed' and 'surplus to requirements'.

Is it possible to get euthanised twice?

NineOneFour wrote:Why are these stupid ideas allowed to propagate on our forum?

Judging from the responses so far, it's not so much propagating as it's sinking like a lead balloon

I'm with Spearthrower on this one. If the question was asked as a poe/troll to get a rise, then it's working. If it was asked in earnest, I doubt the asker finds the "this question is stupid" responses especially convincing.

...Of course, I'm seeing little in the way of response discussion from the OP

cjoe1994 wrote:I have nothing against disabled people, but if someone can't work and has no one to work for them, why is their life so important? How is it fair that money is wasted on people who aren't particularly useful for much at all when money could easily be spent to save productive and important people and improve their quality of life?

Why not just humanely kill/"murder" them?

Because my OH and family would miss me?

SafeAsMilk wrote:
...Of course, I'm seeing little in the way of response discussion from the OP

cjoe1994 just popped by to view the thread... but clearly had nothing to add!

I'll leave this for him to consider:

the mark of a civilized society is the way it treats its most vulnerable citizens

Right on Scot. This cjoe whatever wants me to kill my son.

VanYoungman wrote:Right on Scot. This cjoe whatever wants me to kill my son.

And me my mother.

And me!

Spearthrower wrote:

smudge wrote:

THWOTH wrote:
Who will draw up the criteria and head the panel?

Hmm....I see a new role for myself...

A new career for 2012....

For a start, all those under 6ft tall to be considered 'disabled and surplus to requirements' on grounds they cannot reach top shelves in supermarkets.
All those unable to sufficiently appreciate my good looks to be considered 'disabled, irredeemably flawed' and 'surplus to requirements'.

Is it possible to get euthanised twice?

Not usually.
Special arrangements can be made for stick hurling smart arses....

VanYoungman wrote:Right on Scot. This cjoe whatever wants me to kill my son.

And my mother, and the 100 or so neighbours on the disabled estate they live on.

Incidentally, a large proportion of those neighbours got their disability from serving their country in the armed forces.