Posted: Dec 27, 2011 3:08 am
by GreatApe
:rofl:

Okay ... I'll play along.

cjoe wrote: 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?


Care to define the word "fair" as you see it?

Care to define the word "wasted" as you see it?

Care to define the phrase "particularly useful"?

Care to define "important and productive people"?

If the "important and productive people" need to improve the quality of their lives so much, then maybe they're disabled! Maybe they're NOT so important OR productive. If they're unimportant and haven't produced for a week, can we euthanise them too?

cjoe wrote:
No, just those that aren't supporting themselves or have nobody willing to support them.

Care to define a time limit on not supporting themselves? Are they out of work for a week, a month, a year? How long is too long before you start murdering them?

cjoe wrote: If people are truly willing to support them there can be charities for them.

Not if you've already killed them there can't.

Why do you support post-mortem charities?

--GA