Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 119: This Place is a Dump

(+) Yeah! (+)

Which, I do want to be fair. I'm actually with you on the fact that drug abusers don't really deserve as much thought and care as other people. I just don't really think there's a good way to go about dealing with it.
---

Corrik posted...

HashtagSEP posted...

Corrik posted...

Peace___Frog posted...

Corrik, ever the utilitarian.

Should we also kill off the disabled, the elderly, and anyone who can't score at least a 250 in bowling at the age of 18?

I feel safe saying a childs life is more worthy of being saved than a drug addicts who overdosed on a drug. And, it is laughable you think it is even debatable.

Are you living in a world where every time somebody overdoses, people have to choose between saving them or a child

I live in a world whete ypu appropriate funds which go to certain services. Appropriating funds to repeatedly save drug addicts lives temporarily is a bad appropriation of funds that could have gone somewhere else to benefit those in society who actually deserve the funds more.

If the funds didn't go toward the things needed to treat the drug addicts, the price of other things would rise, so it pretty much evens out.
---

Is it? The idea that we shouldn't help people because we have to help other people is only relevant if there are finite resources, such as with transplants. And this does happen: there are organ donor boards at every hospital that very literally decide who lives and who dies. Children get priority. Parents get priority. Fifty-year-old chain smokers and drug addicts don't. This is all well and good.

What you're describing is entirely different.
---

HashtagSEP posted...

Which, I do want to be fair. I'm actually with you on the fact that drug abusers don't really deserve as much thought and care as other people. I just don't really think there's a good way to go about dealing with it.

Then you agree with me, and I do not understand your argument. There is better uses for better causes for the money put into that service. It shouldn't even be debatable. People blind theirselves because a loved one of some sort is a drug addict. They rationalize it. However, it is not a rationalizeable act.

It would be like appropriating funds to give funerals to drunk drivers who crash and kill themselves.

It is outrageous to me. Compounded greatly by how many times the same people could be the ones over and over who are getting said treatment and not rehabilitating.
---

dowolf posted...

Is it? The idea that we shouldn't help people because we have to help other people is only relevant if there are finite resources, such as with transplants. And this does happen: there are organ donor boards at every hospital that very literally decide who lives and who dies. Children get priority. Parents get priority. Fifty-year-old chain smokers and drug addicts don't. This is all well and good.

What you're describing is entirely different.

It is exactly what I am describing actually.
---

The death panels are coming.
---

Are hospitals so crowded in the US that people are denied service?
---

Drug addicts are just normal people like you and me who ended up with some problem (chronic pain, headaches, insomnia, depression, etc) and decided to self-medicate. There's absolutely no reason in my mind to dedicate less resources to them than anyone else, and maybe some reasons to dedicate more (e.g. if allocation is need-based).

Or we could all follow the teachings of Jesus who I'm pretty sure said "yeah you should just let drug users all die lmao fuck 'em" verbatim.
---

charmander6000 posted...

Are hospitals so crowded in the US that people are denied service?

Never in my experience. There's long waits for minor things sometimes (had to wait an hour once because I had a cut that needed stitches, but it was too late to go anywhere but a hospital), but size/distribution of hospitals is generally managed very well (and it is managed: in NYS, any increase or decrease in capacity, for instance, has to be approved by the government).
---

Most of those drug addicts are someone's mother, father, sister, brother, daughter, son... etc...

Knowing someone who died of a drug overdose... I think it's outrageous to say that they don't 'deserve' to be saved.
---

Kenri posted...

Drug addicts are just normal people like you and me who ended up with some problem (chronic pain, headaches, insomnia, depression, etc) and decided to self-medicate. There's absolutely no reason in my mind to dedicate less resources to them than anyone else, and maybe some reasons to dedicate more (e.g. if allocation is need-based).

Or we could all follow the teachings of Jesus who I'm pretty sure said "yeah you should just let drug users all die lmao fuck 'em" verbatim.

The sad thing is mental health is rarely cared about in our society. If it were these people would be placed as a top priority among patients without a current life-threatening illness/injury
---

Kenri posted...

Drug addicts are just normal people like you and me who ended up with some problem (chronic pain, headaches, insomnia, depression, etc) and decided to self-medicate. There's absolutely no reason in my mind to dedicate less resources to them than anyone else, and maybe some reasons to dedicate more (e.g. if allocation is need-based).

Or we could all follow the teachings of Jesus who I'm pretty sure said "yeah you should just let drug users all die lmao fuck 'em" verbatim.

You are rationalizing. Also wrong in many instances.

Drug addicts are wrong. Not debatable. Does not matter how you got there. There is correcy methods to dealing with your pain. You are choosing illegal methods which also basically support drug dealers and give them incentive to continue to peddle drugs moreso to others.

If no one bought illegal drugs, they wouldn't sell it. It wouldn't propogate. The fact is anyone using heroin has done something illegal and has helped contribute to the drug state of society. It is basically an endorsement and monetary support of the illegal crime cycle.

No.

These people should not be worth more than others who do not commit crimes. You are responsible for your actions. These people are making the wrong choices, knowingly.
---

Ashethan posted...

Most of those drug addicts are someone's mother, father, sister, brother, daughter, son... etc...

Knowing someone who died of a drug overdose... I think it's outrageous to say that they don't 'deserve' to be saved.

So, when do we as a society start to admit wrongs? Okay
Then your mother father sister brother daughtet son etc has made decisions which are WRONG and needs to be acknowledged as wrong and not rationalized or understood due to your emotional attachment.

Someone being your relation does not make their action magically understandable or sympathetic. Wrong is wrong no matter who they are.
---

http://abcn.ws/2vBavla

Is it fair to call McConnell a cuck now?
---

There's a difference between doing something stupid, doing something wrong, and doing something unforgivable.

Drugs may fall under one or both of the first two categories (depending on externalities), not the third. We're not taking about rapists or murderers.

It also benefits everyone if we can rehabilitate addicts into productive members of society.
---

The party of pro-life everyone! Everyone deserves to live... except drug addicts. Oh and let's add cigarette smokers to that too, because cigarette smoking causes lung cancer. And while we're at it Obese people as well. Heart attack waiting to happen. And people who shoot themselves by accident are at fault as well. They shouldn't have been playing with guns to start with. Certainly can't save drunk drivers either. Or people who get shot by police--they shouldn't get treatment because they were probably doing something illegal to get shot in the first place, or made the police feel like their lives were in danger. No treatment for kids who didn't get their vaccinations either, since they should have gotten their vaccinations. Oh and we can't treat people in prison either, since they're all criminals.
---

lol @ anyone defending trickle-down economics in 2017.
---

Pretty much, if you've been born you've sinned and don't deserve treatment. We should be devoting more resources to protecting innocent babies who have yet to be born.
---

TheRock1525 posted...

http://abcn.ws/2vBavla

Is it fair to call McConnell a cuck now?

Honestly he should have been saying this back in like March. It's a fair point at least to an extent, but he's only making it after trying to play along with Trump's expectations and failing to do so.
---

Pretty much, if you've been born you've sinned and don't deserve treatment. We should be devoting more resources to protecting innocent babies who have yet to be born.

Do c-sections prevent you from getting original sin?
---

Corrik posted...

Kenri posted...

Drug addicts are just normal people like you and me who ended up with some problem (chronic pain, headaches, insomnia, depression, etc) and decided to self-medicate. There's absolutely no reason in my mind to dedicate less resources to them than anyone else, and maybe some reasons to dedicate more (e.g. if allocation is need-based).

Or we could all follow the teachings of Jesus who I'm pretty sure said "yeah you should just let drug users all die lmao fuck 'em" verbatim.

You are rationalizing. Also wrong in many instances.

Drug addicts are wrong. Not debatable. Does not matter how you got there. There is correcy methods to dealing with your pain. You are choosing illegal methods which also basically support drug dealers and give them incentive to continue to peddle drugs moreso to others.

If no one bought illegal drugs, they wouldn't sell it. It wouldn't propogate. The fact is anyone using heroin has done something illegal and has helped contribute to the drug state of society. It is basically an endorsement and monetary support of the illegal crime cycle.

No.

These people should not be worth more than others who do not commit crimes. You are responsible for your actions. These people are making the wrong choices, knowingly.

I literally do not give a single shit if something is legal or illegal, that factors 0% into my morals and beliefs about saving people's lives. Why does it factor into yours?


charmander6000 posted...

The sad thing is mental health is rarely cared about in our society. If it were these people would be placed as a top priority among patients without a current life-threatening illness/injury

Yeah it's truly depressing (uh, no pun intended). It seems like even the mental health care we do have is more about getting someone functional enough to work again, not helping or curing them.
---

charmander6000 posted...

Pretty much, if you've been born you've sinned and don't deserve treatment. We should be devoting more resources to protecting innocent babies who have yet to be born.

Do c-sections prevent you from getting original sin?

Worked for Macduff.
---

So it appears Trump slept through the Cold War or something - threatening North Korea that ifthey dont stop making threats they will face "Fire and Fury"

All well and good Donny but they'll be able to literally fire nuclear warheads back at DC you idiot.
---

Guys I blocked Corrik months ago because he is a huge piece of shit.

Why are you engaging him?
---

https://news.vice.com/story/trump-folder-positive-news-white-house

Twice a day since the beginning of the Trump administration, a special folder is prepared for the president. The first document is prepared around 9:30 a.m. and the follow-up, around 4:30 p.m. Former Chief of Staff Reince Priebus and former Press Secretary Sean Spicer both wanted the privilege of delivering the 20-to-25-page packet to President Trump personally, White House sources say.


this is literally the plot of South Park's episode Safe Space where Butters has the job of filtering Cartman's social media.

and then on top of that don't forget the Real News facebook videos blatantly pulled from Colbert's bit!
---

Kenri posted...

I literally do not give a single shit if something is legal or illegal, that factors 0% into my morals and beliefs about saving people's lives. Why does it factor into yours?

Legalism is a legitimate moral philosophy - I understand that its not for everyone, but the idea that if something was agreed upon enough as bad to be illegal that is also immoral is an idea that exists and has for centuries.
---

Jakyl25 posted...

He's saying that if you aren't "motivated" to do what's necessary to escape poverty, you deserve to be poor.

It's a common conservative inhumane belief

If you have not worked to better yourself, you have not earned a better life.

Be mad at God or the Universe for that one, not conservatism.
---

Kenri, you are saying if someone just murdered 4 kids and if someone who just cured cancer are on a cliff, you would flip a coin to see who you save because the one person's life isn't worth more than the other????
---

Nelson_Mandela posted...

Be mad at God or the Universe for that one, not conservatism.

what
---

Nelson_Mandela posted...

If you have not worked to better yourself, you have not earned a better life.

what if you're unable to work?
---

Nelson_Mandela posted...

Jakyl25 posted...

He's saying that if you aren't "motivated" to do what's necessary to escape poverty, you deserve to be poor.

It's a common conservative inhumane belief

If you have not worked to better yourself, you have not earned a better life.

Be mad at God or the Universe for that one, not conservatism.

I can be mad at conservatism for removing the tools that allow people to work to better themselves.

"It's god's fault that you don't have any arrows to shoot at the target," he says after taking the arrows from everyone's quiver and putting them in his own. "I condemn all violence but will stand my ground if you try to take anything from me," he continued as he cocked his gun.
---

GuessMyUserName posted...

https://news.vice.com/story/trump-folder-positive-news-white-house

Twice a day since the beginning of the Trump administration, a special folder is prepared for the president. The first document is prepared around 9:30 a.m. and the follow-up, around 4:30 p.m. Former Chief of Staff Reince Priebus and former Press Secretary Sean Spicer both wanted the privilege of delivering the 20-to-25-page packet to President Trump personally, White House sources say.


this is literally the plot of South Park's episode Safe Space where Butters has the job of filtering Cartman's social media.

and then on top of that don't forget the Real News facebook videos blatantly pulled from Colbert's bit!

https://twitter.com/danpfeiffer/status/894988567776157696
---

Corrik posted...

Kenri, you are saying if someone just murdered 4 kids and if someone who just cured cancer are on a cliff, you would flip a coin to see who you save because the one person's life isn't worth more than the other????

That's a bit of a far cry from

"anyone who breaks any law deserves to be stripped of their rights" though dont you think?

But let me ask you - do you believe that all laws are just? Or do you base your sense of justice around what the law currently is?
---

GuessMyUserName posted...

Nelson_Mandela posted...

Be mad at God or the Universe for that one, not conservatism.

what

Being rewarded for hard work, ingenuity, and even luck is the story of life itself. Saying that everyone deserves good things regardless of effort and skill isn't "humane," it's butting heads with nature.
---

Peace___Frog posted...

Nelson_Mandela posted...

Jakyl25 posted...

He's saying that if you aren't "motivated" to do what's necessary to escape poverty, you deserve to be poor.

It's a common conservative inhumane belief

If you have not worked to better yourself, you have not earned a better life.

Be mad at God or the Universe for that one, not conservatism.

I can be mad at conservatism for removing the tools that allow people to work to better themselves.

"It's god's fault that you don't have any arrows to shoot at the target," he says after taking the arrows from everyone's quiver and putting them in his own. "I condemn all violence but will stand my ground if you try to take anything from me," he continued as he cocked his gun.

So you believe the wealthy steal from the poor, despite the fact that the wealthy pay for the vast majority of public services through taxes...
---

Nelson_Mandela posted...

Saying that everyone deserves good things regardless of effort and skill isn't "humane," it's butting heads with nature.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztVMib1T4T4
---

https://mobile.twitter.com/AP/status/895003246372294657
Who's looking forward to the Korean Missile Crisis???
---

everything about being human is butting heads with nature
---

If we didn't butt heads with nature we'd all have dozens of kids, only around a quarter of whom would reach adult hood, starting when we were 14 and then die by the age of 45.

The entire practice of medicine and anything done to increase quality of life is butting heads with nature.
---

The entire point of society and civilization is rejecting nature's status quo in the first place.
---

Eddv posted...

Corrik posted...

Kenri, you are saying if someone just murdered 4 kids and if someone who just cured cancer are on a cliff, you would flip a coin to see who you save because the one person's life isn't worth more than the other????

That's a bit of a far cry from

"anyone who breaks any law deserves to be stripped of their rights" though dont you think?

But let me ask you - do you believe that all laws are just? Or do you base your sense of justice around what the law currently is?

Society dictates what is just via laws. Society has also shaped over time what is just or not. Putting yourself above society's judgment is kind of selfish.

Do I think some laws are dumb? Sure. Just as I think some Presidents nake dumb choices. I, however, acknowledge and respect said laws or decisions as a society without law is chaos.
---

Corrik posted...

Kenri, you are saying if someone just murdered 4 kids and if someone who just cured cancer are on a cliff, you would flip a coin to see who you save because the one person's life isn't worth more than the other????

Nope, I'm saying I'd save the guy who just cured cancer, even if curing cancer was illegal and murder was legal. What would you do in that situation?


Eddv posted...

Legalism is a legitimate moral philosophy - I understand that its not for everyone, but the idea that if something was agreed upon enough as bad to be illegal that is also immoral is an idea that exists and has for centuries.

There are lots of legitimate moral philosophies that are also abhorrent, so *shrug*
---

Everyone in America has the right to life and freedom, so those who are not capable of those on their own should be protected. There is no right to income equality. Therefore, I choose not to create a society that artificially elevates those who are not capable of greatness.

Not sure what's "inhumane" about that.
---

You know what butts up against nature?

The internet.

Quick, time to get off the internet and never use it again, SephyG!
---

It must be nice living in a fantasy land where working hard actually matters more than the fluke of birth granting untold advantages.
---

Nelson_Mandela posted...

Everyone in America has the right to life and freedom

are you sure you actually believe this
---

GuessMyUserName posted...

Twice a day since the beginning of the Trump administration, a special folder is prepared for the president. The first document is prepared around 9:30 a.m. and the follow-up, around 4:30 p.m. Former Chief of Staff Reince Priebus and former Press Secretary Sean Spicer both wanted the privilege of delivering the 20-to-25-page packet to President Trump personally, White House sources say.

This is disturbing on so many levels.
---

Nelson_Mandela posted...

Everyone in America has the right to life and freedom

So if life is a right then free healthcare should be a right.
---

Espeon posted...

It must be nice living in a fantasy land where working hard actually matters more than the fluke of birth granting untold advantages.

well, sephy does believe black people have it way easier in the US than white people.
---

Nelson_Mandela posted...

Everyone in America has the right to life and freedom, so those who are not capable of those on their own should be protected. There is no right to income equality. Therefore, I choose not to create a society that artificially elevates those who are not capable of greatness.

Not sure what's "inhumane" about that.

You're right. So don't conflate opportunity equality with income equality.
---