Though your evangelistic ethical argument might have some good points, what potential answers (beyond a desire for 'heartfelt decisions" have you offered?
in light of your desire for equality among the living, and in the broader context of your country you might want to consider how distributive justice might be achieved. In the end, I agree with you that all life is important and as we age the fear of not being valuable or worthy of help is frightening.
I think the last 10 years, no how about a thousand years has shown us who receives the most resources. it isn't the weak,or the less privileged. "triage" by it's very definition is a list of criteria that determines access to medical treatment and bears no relation to a 'heartfelt model". Battlefield triage the ultimate example of statistical (read Utilitarian) resource allocation.
Your analogy regarding your 'battlefield" model is somewhat suspect. Firstly are Military guidelines placed in the open for debate among the general public? No. and 2nd, the military certainly doesn't view all lives as equal, and isn't reacting on 'heartfelt' individualism. Who would receive the most immanent treatment... an officer who required to lead and direct others, or a foot soldier? how about the enemy? or injured civilians?
I find his shock at the medical community of FL prudently thinking about the potential problems to be ludicrous. This cornball talks about how precious life is, but he didn't get into why. His only complaint is that the medical community published their thoughts on concerns of the future.
If we could save everyone, we definitely would. The problem is that we can't endlessly spend money. That problem is - very unfortunately - REAL and we have to cope with it and try to find the least damaging REAL solutions to it...
You're a weird person, talking like the instance that has all the knowledge needed to solve our problems. Guidelines are here to make decisions 1) more objective 2) easier for the person who has to take them. Do you want subjective decisions what might prevent you from getting health care just because the doctor doesn't like the color of your shirt?
Sadly what people don't realize is that someone always has to suffer. It is better to plan this out and be ready rather than have to make a possibly worse decision there.
Hey now, that video isn't quite fair to us Utilitarians. Killing off the sick and diseased will create MUCH unhappiness. That is, unless they want to die, in which case I think they should have that right. Just my two cents.
AHHH Why do you christians care about this stuff anyway? All you have to do is prey to god and he will cure all deceases. who needs hospitals why you have JESUS !!
@jasason10 Huh? Are you living in the real world Jasason10? You think just because some people have a faith in a god that he will interrupt free will and save everyone. They why even die at all and not just live forever. Or even better why not smite down those unbelievers such as yourself who continue to make fun of religious people.
@jasason10 Hmm. umm... Maybe due to free will and and plus I will bet you everything that you cannot explain where humans came from and why there was a man and a women and why we came out the way were are and also why we developed higher brain functions. Please explain and slowely as us religious folk can't understand big words :)
Yes, thanks for the emails -- Logan's Run had people "terminated" at 30 (not 40) (actually, it was 21 in the book), but I hope I still make a point about the slippery slope related to utilitarian ethics and resource allocation models applied to health care and life decisions.
Obama has yet to sign the executive order about abortion...even though he signed the health care reform. He said he'd sign it later....soooooo now what?
I know, I know, BrotherAJ, Logan's Run had people "terminated" at 30 (not 40) (actually, it was 21 in the book), but I hope I still make my point about the slippery slope related to utilitarian ethics and resource allocation models applied to health care and life decisions.
@havock89 yeah the whole checks and balances thing is a joke. essentially they are just puppets of satan, ie luke 4:6, ephesians 6:12, et al.
how can they be the arbiters of law, when they are lawless workers of iniquity? they are even whited sepulchres, which outwardly appear righteous, but within are full of dead men's bones and hypocrisy. what is it, like half the congress doesnt even pay taxes or something? jokes on us.
Not sure about you but it looks to me like most Christian conservatives in USA who voice their opinion on the internet are conservative first and Christian second. Why else would they not want to pay more taxes to cover the tens of millions uninsured people you have. what happened to all are equal and life is precious i ask?
The early Christians of the 1st century lived as communities in which they pooled their resources & those were used to meet everyone's needs
Despite appearances, that was not Marxism. That was "charity" and there is a huge difference. Marxism, as an official, political movement or party, should have never been legal in this country. Marxists seeking to establish themselves & their Marxism within government, can't possibly possess the Constitutional right to do that, since Marxism is
inherently authoritarian. Thus, its diametrically opposed to the US Constitution. In short, no one has the right to alienate one from his rights
Personally, I couldn't care less where Obama was born. But his Marxism has no business in my country. Authoritarianism is the reason for the Constitution's creation. Authoritarianism is the enemy
Historically in America, its been Christians whom have most often founded the institutions that provide for the needs of the unfortunate
I hope you are aware that the thing you're quoting took place in today's healthcare environment, not the one that might occur in the future if health care legislation passes. You don't think health insurance companies and for-profit providers make choices like this now? I'd rather the government decide than some company that only cares about profit.
{I'd rather the government decide than some company}
Making decisions is power. The way its supposed to work is that "we the people", holding the power, decide to be represented by those who would relay our decisions
Giving our decision making authority to government, is giving our power to them. Under Marxist circumstances, its not "delegating" the power to representatives. Its literally "giving" the power to authoritarians
Its supposed to be that the "companies & corporations" are
"we the people". Thus, the companies would elect to conduct their business in a fair & ethical manner. That being the most beneficial scenario for the society of which they are a part
I know it sounds laughably unrealistic. But that's simply because it is indeed true that "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other"
- John Adams
America has become a nation of milk vendors... selling white water!
Have you seen the video where the FBI guy shoots himself in the foot? Thats us! We should have all elected him for President....an appropriate representative. Hey, he's perfect... he's even Black
In a way, one can say we're all Black now... since we've started to elect our own Marxist "slavery"
Now we're going to see just how truly Black loving are the politically correct. Now we'll all get to "wear it", see how you'll like the treatment of it now
Our troubles are from Godlessness. Some have endured in the south, still singing "There will be no more weeping & wailing"
If some wacko is going through a college campus shooting the place up and killing people and I take a weapon and kill the wacko, am I a murderer.....nope. I would be a hero.
i disagree. the Bible says thou shalt not kill. Jesus said to love our enemies.
Jesus only said in one place, "he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one."
but Jesus could be talking about the Word of God, ie hebrews 4:12. the disciples said "here are two swords," and Jesus replied "it is enough."
but after Peter cut off the servants ear, Jesus said specifically "Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword."
@Leiflton then it says in Revelation "he that killeth with the sword MUST BE KILLED with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints."
thats the same as in Genesis,
"Whoso sheddeth man's blood, BY MAN SHALL HIS BLOOD BE SHED: for in the image of God made he man."
So I should sit back and watch the wacko kill a bunch of people and do nothing but love the wacko? Because Jesus said to love thy enemy, that would make me and any love I give impotent.
Leifton, I doubt that you would sit on your hands and do nothing when a wacko is killing your family and you can do something about it.
Things are not quite that simple. The things you're speaking about are things which over the years have been the subject over which many brilliant minds have contemplated & debated
The verse from scripture is completely correct in its meaning. But saying we have no right to kill another human "under any circumstances", is not correct because its correct
Its correct when regarding one who may be trying to kill you. But because he's trying to kill you is why its incorrect to say that
you dont have the right to defend yourself even if it kills him. Also, there exists "Capital Punishment". Of which, its legal precedence was set by God
You said "any killing is murder". But that's not correct. This is an area where many Christians often err. For example, by calling abortion "murder"
Murder is a "legal" term and abortion is not illegal... as horrendous as is it. Whether or not it should be illegal is another matter. But even if it were legislated illegal, its violation doesn't
It doesn't even have to entail jail time... except but for those who perform the service. All that would require determining
Abortion is definitely exceedingly morally wrong. But this country has made the mistake of having Satanists determine their own practices to be legal. Determined by unelected judges. Apparently, the founders wrote also with invisible ink. For I have yet to find any reference to "private" killings" being inalienable rights
I know, I know, Logan's Run had people "terminated" at 30 (not 40) (actually, it was 21 in the book), but I hope I still make my point about the slippery slope related to utilitarian ethics and resource allocation models applied to health care and life decisions.
I don't understand the argument. You are only allowed to be utilitarian if you don't plan it in advance? What is different in the battlefield medic treating soldiers because of x, y, and z, and writing x, y, and z in a "manual." If we were more utilitarian with our health care, more people could have access to... HEALTH CARE! Meaning MORE people would survive. Should we not do what maximizes the most people surviving?
Though your evangelistic ethical argument might have some good points, what potential answers (beyond a desire for 'heartfelt decisions" have you offered?
in light of your desire for equality among the living, and in the broader context of your country you might want to consider how distributive justice might be achieved. In the end, I agree with you that all life is important and as we age the fear of not being valuable or worthy of help is frightening.
MrGrumbleshanks 2 months ago
I think the last 10 years, no how about a thousand years has shown us who receives the most resources. it isn't the weak,or the less privileged. "triage" by it's very definition is a list of criteria that determines access to medical treatment and bears no relation to a 'heartfelt model". Battlefield triage the ultimate example of statistical (read Utilitarian) resource allocation.
MrGrumbleshanks 2 months ago
Your analogy regarding your 'battlefield" model is somewhat suspect. Firstly are Military guidelines placed in the open for debate among the general public? No. and 2nd, the military certainly doesn't view all lives as equal, and isn't reacting on 'heartfelt' individualism. Who would receive the most immanent treatment... an officer who required to lead and direct others, or a foot soldier? how about the enemy? or injured civilians?
MrGrumbleshanks 2 months ago
I find his shock at the medical community of FL prudently thinking about the potential problems to be ludicrous. This cornball talks about how precious life is, but he didn't get into why. His only complaint is that the medical community published their thoughts on concerns of the future.
iBishopEsquire 4 months ago
If we could save everyone, we definitely would. The problem is that we can't endlessly spend money. That problem is - very unfortunately - REAL and we have to cope with it and try to find the least damaging REAL solutions to it...
Skabeeri 10 months ago
You're a weird person, talking like the instance that has all the knowledge needed to solve our problems. Guidelines are here to make decisions 1) more objective 2) easier for the person who has to take them. Do you want subjective decisions what might prevent you from getting health care just because the doctor doesn't like the color of your shirt?
Skabeeri 10 months ago
Sadly what people don't realize is that someone always has to suffer. It is better to plan this out and be ready rather than have to make a possibly worse decision there.
88Factor 1 year ago 2
Hey now, that video isn't quite fair to us Utilitarians. Killing off the sick and diseased will create MUCH unhappiness. That is, unless they want to die, in which case I think they should have that right. Just my two cents.
MomSaysImCool 1 year ago
AHHH Why do you christians care about this stuff anyway? All you have to do is prey to god and he will cure all deceases. who needs hospitals why you have JESUS !!
jasason10 1 year ago
@jasason10 Huh? Are you living in the real world Jasason10? You think just because some people have a faith in a god that he will interrupt free will and save everyone. They why even die at all and not just live forever. Or even better why not smite down those unbelievers such as yourself who continue to make fun of religious people.
Tbone282 1 year ago
@jasason10 Hmm. umm... Maybe due to free will and and plus I will bet you everything that you cannot explain where humans came from and why there was a man and a women and why we came out the way were are and also why we developed higher brain functions. Please explain and slowely as us religious folk can't understand big words :)
Tbone282 1 year ago
Yes, thanks for the emails -- Logan's Run had people "terminated" at 30 (not 40) (actually, it was 21 in the book), but I hope I still make a point about the slippery slope related to utilitarian ethics and resource allocation models applied to health care and life decisions.
reflect7 1 year ago
Obama has yet to sign the executive order about abortion...even though he signed the health care reform. He said he'd sign it later....soooooo now what?
EriksDiva 1 year ago
Times...they are getting interesting!
TheEdge012 1 year ago
TEST TEST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Leiflton 1 year ago
ok sorry, i figured it out now...if anyone has problems with the comments, click "Options" next to "Text Comments,"
and then select "Show All Comments."
Leiflton 1 year ago
whats going on with the youtube comments of late?
youtube changed something and now its not working properly....
Leiflton 1 year ago
I know, I know, BrotherAJ, Logan's Run had people "terminated" at 30 (not 40) (actually, it was 21 in the book), but I hope I still make my point about the slippery slope related to utilitarian ethics and resource allocation models applied to health care and life decisions.
reflect7 1 year ago
@reflect7 not sure if you know this, but the slippery slope is, in itself, a logical fallacy.
sentientist 1 year ago
Abortion is not healthcare. In this bill abortions
would be payed for using federal tax dollars.
2000yrCatholic 1 year ago
apparently obama signed an EO so the abortion part will be removed...but the bill is still a hellish nightmare.
i dont see how i can participate.
what will they do unto me? i cant see paying them a dime.
all i know is if you refuse the mark of the beast you will be killed/beheaded.
people are going to have to start drawing some lines.
Leiflton 1 year ago
Obama has no authority to write or ammend laws. The job of the president is to enforce laws, not create them. Congress does that.
Everyone who knows anything about law, knows that this move by obama is an outright lie, and only the irgnorant will fall for it.
havock89 1 year ago
@havock89 yeah the whole checks and balances thing is a joke. essentially they are just puppets of satan, ie luke 4:6, ephesians 6:12, et al.
how can they be the arbiters of law, when they are lawless workers of iniquity? they are even whited sepulchres, which outwardly appear righteous, but within are full of dead men's bones and hypocrisy. what is it, like half the congress doesnt even pay taxes or something? jokes on us.
Leiflton 1 year ago
Another great video Randall, but in Logan's Run the age is 30 not 40; just saying.
BrotherAJ213 1 year ago
Not sure about you but it looks to me like most Christian conservatives in USA who voice their opinion on the internet are conservative first and Christian second. Why else would they not want to pay more taxes to cover the tens of millions uninsured people you have. what happened to all are equal and life is precious i ask?
eyejab 1 year ago
eyejab
The early Christians of the 1st century lived as communities in which they pooled their resources & those were used to meet everyone's needs
Despite appearances, that was not Marxism. That was "charity" and there is a huge difference. Marxism, as an official, political movement or party, should have never been legal in this country. Marxists seeking to establish themselves & their Marxism within government, can't possibly possess the Constitutional right to do that, since Marxism is
Chuichupachichi 1 year ago
inherently authoritarian. Thus, its diametrically opposed to the US Constitution. In short, no one has the right to alienate one from his rights
Personally, I couldn't care less where Obama was born. But his Marxism has no business in my country. Authoritarianism is the reason for the Constitution's creation. Authoritarianism is the enemy
Historically in America, its been Christians whom have most often founded the institutions that provide for the needs of the unfortunate
Your kind haven't
Chuichupachichi 1 year ago
I hope you are aware that the thing you're quoting took place in today's healthcare environment, not the one that might occur in the future if health care legislation passes. You don't think health insurance companies and for-profit providers make choices like this now? I'd rather the government decide than some company that only cares about profit.
plymalel 1 year ago
@plymalel
{I'd rather the government decide than some company}
Making decisions is power. The way its supposed to work is that "we the people", holding the power, decide to be represented by those who would relay our decisions
Giving our decision making authority to government, is giving our power to them. Under Marxist circumstances, its not "delegating" the power to representatives. Its literally "giving" the power to authoritarians
Its supposed to be that the "companies & corporations" are
Chuichupachichi 1 year ago
"we the people". Thus, the companies would elect to conduct their business in a fair & ethical manner. That being the most beneficial scenario for the society of which they are a part
I know it sounds laughably unrealistic. But that's simply because it is indeed true that "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other"
- John Adams
America has become a nation of milk vendors... selling white water!
Chuichupachichi 1 year ago
Have you seen the video where the FBI guy shoots himself in the foot? Thats us! We should have all elected him for President....an appropriate representative. Hey, he's perfect... he's even Black
In a way, one can say we're all Black now... since we've started to elect our own Marxist "slavery"
Chuichupachichi 1 year ago
Now we're going to see just how truly Black loving are the politically correct. Now we'll all get to "wear it", see how you'll like the treatment of it now
Our troubles are from Godlessness. Some have endured in the south, still singing "There will be no more weeping & wailing"
Chuichupachichi 1 year ago
yeah Jesus says insomuch as you have (or have not) done it unto the least of these, you have done it unto ME.
we do not have a right to kill another human being under any circumstances, for we are made in the image of God.
any killing is murder, and murderers shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
and if you hate your brother you are a murderer as well.
Leiflton 1 year ago
not all killing is murder.
If some wacko is going through a college campus shooting the place up and killing people and I take a weapon and kill the wacko, am I a murderer.....nope. I would be a hero.
Ironhoist 1 year ago
i disagree. the Bible says thou shalt not kill. Jesus said to love our enemies.
Jesus only said in one place, "he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one."
but Jesus could be talking about the Word of God, ie hebrews 4:12. the disciples said "here are two swords," and Jesus replied "it is enough."
but after Peter cut off the servants ear, Jesus said specifically "Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword."
Leiflton 1 year ago
@Leiflton then it says in Revelation "he that killeth with the sword MUST BE KILLED with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints."
thats the same as in Genesis,
"Whoso sheddeth man's blood, BY MAN SHALL HIS BLOOD BE SHED: for in the image of God made he man."
Leiflton 1 year ago
So I should sit back and watch the wacko kill a bunch of people and do nothing but love the wacko? Because Jesus said to love thy enemy, that would make me and any love I give impotent.
Leifton, I doubt that you would sit on your hands and do nothing when a wacko is killing your family and you can do something about it.
Ironhoist 1 year ago
@Ironhoist no, i dont think we should be idle in such a situation. personally i think we should try to apprehend the assailant and restrain him.
Leiflton 1 year ago
@ Leifton
ok, fair enough. I will have to disagree with you. I see your point and understand your position and your other comments of late but still disagree.
God bless!
Ironhoist 1 year ago
@Ironhoist yeah its cool. i dont think i agree with anyone else 100% either. we just have to keep seeking the truth and we "will find."
Leiflton 1 year ago
@Leiflton
Things are not quite that simple. The things you're speaking about are things which over the years have been the subject over which many brilliant minds have contemplated & debated
The verse from scripture is completely correct in its meaning. But saying we have no right to kill another human "under any circumstances", is not correct because its correct
Its correct when regarding one who may be trying to kill you. But because he's trying to kill you is why its incorrect to say that
Chuichupachichi 1 year ago
yes it is that simple.
"Dearly beloved, AVENGE NOT YOURSELVES, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I WILL REPAY, saith the Lord."
all killing is murder.
capital punishment is murder. killing in self-defense is murder. killing a baby or euthanising the elderly is murder. killing in wars is murder.
and hatred is murder as i said.
so we're all pretty much guilty of murder right there. thats why people have to repent.
Leiflton 1 year ago
you dont have the right to defend yourself even if it kills him. Also, there exists "Capital Punishment". Of which, its legal precedence was set by God
You said "any killing is murder". But that's not correct. This is an area where many Christians often err. For example, by calling abortion "murder"
Murder is a "legal" term and abortion is not illegal... as horrendous as is it. Whether or not it should be illegal is another matter. But even if it were legislated illegal, its violation doesn't
Chuichupachichi 1 year ago
have to be considered murder
It doesn't even have to entail jail time... except but for those who perform the service. All that would require determining
Abortion is definitely exceedingly morally wrong. But this country has made the mistake of having Satanists determine their own practices to be legal. Determined by unelected judges. Apparently, the founders wrote also with invisible ink. For I have yet to find any reference to "private" killings" being inalienable rights
Chuichupachichi 1 year ago
God bless you!
MacAr7huR 1 year ago
I know, I know, Logan's Run had people "terminated" at 30 (not 40) (actually, it was 21 in the book), but I hope I still make my point about the slippery slope related to utilitarian ethics and resource allocation models applied to health care and life decisions.
reflect7 1 year ago 2
I don't understand the argument. You are only allowed to be utilitarian if you don't plan it in advance? What is different in the battlefield medic treating soldiers because of x, y, and z, and writing x, y, and z in a "manual." If we were more utilitarian with our health care, more people could have access to... HEALTH CARE! Meaning MORE people would survive. Should we not do what maximizes the most people surviving?
Tcrowaf 1 year ago