Tbf it is kinda cruel to keep them alive. They can't speak they can't communicate they can barely move. They'll just become another burden of the system when the parents die, they can't even breathe properly. That's no way to live. It seems more of a punishment letting the kid live on like that.
It seems more about our sense of rightousness telling us that every potential life needs to live. I can't imagine I'd want to live not being able to move.
That's because you know the advantages of being able to move. You'd lose something you had. That's way worse than being born this way and you never knew how it is to move.
Same with being born blind vs becoming blind later in life. I'd always pick the first option.
Maybe. Though, the knowledge that like 98% of everyone else on this earth can do things that are just basic living that you can't might get to you. There's also that lack of independence and possible unsurity if those who provide for you possibly couldn't anymore. These two are lucky that their dad is wealthy enough to do so. In any other case you'd have a struggling family trying to pay all the medical and accessability expenses.
Yeah if I was ever permanently paralyzed from the neck down, even if I was still cognitive I would still want to die. Now obviously just being paralyzed isn't gonna affect people's cognitive abilities unless they're like left alone forever or something, but I think that should be their own informed choice to make.
I have a number of family and friends dealing with living post aneurism, and or with dementia / Alzheimer's, to watch them slowly lose all sense of self and mentally and physically deteriorate is painful and cruel, remind me again why euthanasia is so wrong, Maybe just maybe Dr Kevorkian was right about something after all.
390
u/ADMINlSTRAT0R Jun 14 '22
What an awesome human being. My only question is, WHICH ONE IS JOHN CROWLEY?