If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(BBC)   Sudden shock of cellphone's ringtone stops girl's heart. Can you hear me -- ow?   (news.bbc.co.uk) divider line 54
    More: Sad  
•       •       •

12561 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Dec 2006 at 5:16 PM (8 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



54 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2006-12-03 12:11:53 PM  
Armed and Delerious

You are missing a fundemental point, and that is the level of contribution to society. A person, simply by existing, has contributed to society, and by creating new (even damaged children) they are adding to the world over all. How many jobs are created in researching cures for these strange diseases? How many jobs are maintained through the upkeep and production of the nessicary elements for keeping these people alive? This is the pragmatic approach, however lets look at a few others, to figure out if your logic is sound.

What about people with a genetic pre-disposition to _______ ? Diabetes, Scoliosis (historically, this greatly impared your ability to labor), Parkinsons, Alzihmers, etc.....

Should we look at those with a family history of mental disease while we are at it? I mean, if we are going to "fix" society on the genetic level...

Its not a question of "where" you draw the line, its a question of if there should be a line at all. Given that one of the most brilliant thinkers of our time would be lost to your system (Steven Hawkings) I think its slightly flawed. No matter what you can say about exceptions "proving" rules; the level of contribution that one man has made to our theories of the universe will be felt throughout the ages. Simply put, he is one of the most influential thinkers of our time. What about him, and those like him?
 
2006-12-03 03:41:54 PM  
This is nature's way of saying, "This one's broken, please try again." It's sad and all that she died, but it ain't called survival of the fittest for nothing.

I really doubt you would say that if it was your kid. It's a pretty moronic notion anyway.
 
2006-12-03 08:10:10 PM  
We could be eliminating the next Hitler as well, Dughan, but that would be a flawed argument. If we break it down into an equasion, we would have to deal with averages. However you decide to measure it, the average contribution made by someone with a terminal illness like this one will most likely be less than the average contribution made by someone without.
But who would make such an equasion? Who would be able or willing to make some sort of formula for deciding who should be allowed to live, and who should die for the good of all mankind? You too missed a fundamental point in what I wrote. We cannot draw a line, or at least we will not draw a line. Either we discover a way to permenantly fix genetic defects (which hasn't come in the decade since I first heard about the technology), or I believe nature will draw that line for us.
 
2006-12-04 12:51:27 AM  
No lawsuit against the cell phone maker? Obviously not America.

Are we to understand this girl never used an alarm clock?
 
Displayed 4 of 54 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report