Worker's rights not to do work?

Post #200,905 by Arkadiy 3/28/05 1:51:15 PM Reply	Worker's rights not to do work? That's a new one. Or, rather, an old one, but used backwards. -- And what are we doing when the two most powerful nations on earth -- America and Israel -- stomp on the elementary rights of human beings? -- letter to the editor from W. Ostermeier, Liechtenstein
Post #200,906 by jake123 3/28/05 1:58:06 PM Reply	It's the flipside of soviet statism except this time it's theological instead of marxist in nature. The methods are applicable regardless of the underlying ideology; it just requires AN ideology to apply for them to be able to work. --\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n* Jack Troughton jake at consultron.ca \n [link\|http://consultron.ca\|http://consultron.ca] [link\|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca\|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca] \n Kingston Ontario Canada [link\|news://news.consultron.ca\|news://news.consultron.ca] *\n-------------------------------------------------------------------
Post #200,909 by Arkadiy 3/28/05 2:12:34 PM Reply	Tank you Care to look for more examples? -- And what are we doing when the two most powerful nations on earth -- America and Israel -- stomp on the elementary rights of human beings? -- letter to the editor from W. Ostermeier, Liechtenstein
Post #200,919 by jake123 3/28/05 3:24:34 PM Reply	History is replete:) The methods of stalinist russia bear a strong resemblence to the methods of fascist germany or italy. You can take those methods and use them with religion as the backstop: cf- Iran, Taliban. If you don't think that the hardcore religious right in the US wouldn't like to set up a totalitarian theocratic system there, you're not paying attention. Look at Schiavo: that which is a family decision according to the law has been the cause celebre to attempt to extend the powers of the state beyond their constitutional limits to impinge upon the powers vouchsafed to the judiciary, not to mention to arrogate powers from the state level to the federal level, all in the name of extending the explicitly religious principles of the anti-choice movement. The separation of church and state enshrined in the US constitution is there to forbid exactly this kind of behaviour. --\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n* Jack Troughton jake at consultron.ca \n [link\|http://consultron.ca\|http://consultron.ca] [link\|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca\|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca] \n Kingston Ontario Canada [link\|news://news.consultron.ca\|news://news.consultron.ca] *\n-------------------------------------------------------------------
Post #201,046 by Arkadiy 3/29/05 9:10:44 AM Reply	You're diverging off-topic We were talking about the rights of workers, not about methods of government. Can you find more examples of worker's right not to work? Now I'll follow you off-topic :) The separation of Church and State in the Constitution was put there, IMHO, to protect us from something far more eggergious than what happened in Schiavo's case. Nowadays it's used to protect State from ever seeing anthing that is remotely like Church. I don't think it was the original intent, nor is it a good policy. My final opinion on Schiavo is that we had another miscarriage of justice. It's not first, nor will it be the last. The system is not perfect, unfortunately. Still, it's all we got. Breaking the system will cost more lives than it would save. -- And what are we doing when the two most powerful nations on earth -- America and Israel -- stomp on the elementary rights of human beings? -- letter to the editor from W. Ostermeier, Liechtenstein
Post #201,050 by jake123 3/29/05 9:46:05 AM Reply	What miscarriage of justice? --\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n* Jack Troughton jake at consultron.ca \n [link\|http://consultron.ca\|http://consultron.ca] [link\|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca\|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca] \n Kingston Ontario Canada [link\|news://news.consultron.ca\|news://news.consultron.ca] *\n-------------------------------------------------------------------
Post #201,070 by Arkadiy 3/29/05 11:17:15 AM Reply	Somebody who should be alive is dying. With all due process and judicial review. Too bad, but nothing can be done about it. -- And what are we doing when the two most powerful nations on earth -- America and Israel -- stomp on the elementary rights of human beings? -- letter to the editor from W. Ostermeier, Liechtenstein
Post #201,074 by jake123 3/29/05 11:32:00 AM Reply	Hm. That's not the only interpretation; a potential alternative is "Someone whodied years ago and is only being kept alive by medical intervention is finally being permitted to rest." Who gets to make that decision? The state, or the family? If there is disgreement in the family, which member gets to make the decision? The courts made the only reasonable decision they could make, which was to say that her husband gets to make the actual decision about what would happen to his wife. Unless you'd rather arrogate that decision-making power to the state. The desire to see this power taken from the family and given to the state is what drives the people protesting this... as long, of course, as the state agrees with them; this is what leads to my comment about statism as a technique, independent of the ideology underlying it; communism, fascism, or muslim and/or christian theology. As an aside, did you see the interview with her husband? I personally found the statement "what she said was "no tubes for me" to be very compelling. --\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n* Jack Troughton jake at consultron.ca \n [link\|http://consultron.ca\|http://consultron.ca] [link\|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca\|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca] \n Kingston Ontario Canada [link\|news://news.consultron.ca\|news://news.consultron.ca] *\n-------------------------------------------------------------------
Post #201,079 by Arkadiy 3/29/05 11:42:42 AM Reply	It's my personla opinion that she still lives You have different opinion, and I am not about to attempt to persuade you - I tried and failed before. No, I do not want my opinion to triumph at the cost of arrogation of decision power to the state. Maybe I will keep such a clear head when the decision in question will touch me personally. I have little hope of that. As an aside, the state (the judicial barnch) already made the decision. What we don't want to happen is replacing the established procedure of the dicision with something more arbitrary, more personal, more "executive". No, I do not want that. -- And what are we doing when the two most powerful nations on earth -- America and Israel -- stomp on the elementary rights of human beings? -- letter to the editor from W. Ostermeier, Liechtenstein
Post #201,102 by jake123 3/29/05 12:16:07 PM Reply	Neither your opinion nor mine counts in this case It's her husband's opinion that does, and he's made his opinion clear. Whether I think he's right or wrong is sort of besides the point from my perspective. The REAL point for me is that if I were in Terri's position, I'd want Steph to be making those decisions, based on her now very deep knowledge of me, not some clowns angling for political advantage on the back of my carcass, or some other group working on the assumption that they know me and my beliefs better than either I or Steph does. This case is nasty, because it's important, and yet it is also distasteful. All those people doing the demonstrating should just stfu and go home; it's none of their business. --\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n* Jack Troughton jake at consultron.ca \n [link\|http://consultron.ca\|http://consultron.ca] [link\|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca\|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca] \n Kingston Ontario Canada [link\|news://news.consultron.ca\|news://news.consultron.ca] *\n-------------------------------------------------------------------
Post #201,103 by ben_tilly 3/29/05 12:19:15 PM Reply	Question My personal position is that if I'm ever in her position, I want to be killed. Because in all meaningful senses I'd already be dead and I want the people that I care about to not have their grieving process extended unnecessarily. If I wind up in her position, would you or would you not support having my wishes in this matter carried out? There is no "he said that she said" here, you know my wishes, I have just stated them very clearly. I want to know how you'd react to them in that situation. Curiously, Ben I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
Post #201,106 by Arkadiy 3/29/05 12:27:39 PM Reply	If you show the least glimmer of reaction to the situation, if you moan when the tube is taken from you - no, I would not honor your wishes, if it were up to me. You'd have to be even more specific for me to follow. -- And what are we doing when the two most powerful nations on earth -- America and Israel -- stomp on the elementary rights of human beings? -- letter to the editor from W. Ostermeier, Liechtenstein
Post #201,108 by hnick 3/29/05 12:38:23 PM Reply	Careful with your definitiion of reaction.. You can get interesting sounds when you move fresh bodies. Some movements will compress their lungs and push air across the vocal cords. If someone is sufficiently in denial or enough of a shit to lie, they could claim such was an attempt to talk while they were cuddling the body. Remember that all parties concerned are pushing the data to make their case. I wouldn't trust any of them.
Post #201,116 by ben_tilly 3/29/05 2:27:12 PM Reply	I'll be more specific If most of my forebrain was destroyed, enough that in the opinion of neurologists (note, not radiologists and not non-practicing doctors who happen to be grandstanding politicians) I was no longer "Ben", and there was no medical hope that I'd ever regain speech, conciousness, etc, then I do not wish my body to have life preserved in my body. If all I retain is reflexes etc on par with a cat, I don't want my loved ones to be tortured by the continued existence of my breathing corpse. Is that enough for you to be willing to follow my wishes were I in Shavio's position? More difficult for me is the question of what to do if conciousness or the hope of conciousness remained but all that I had left was a life of pain and agony, then I'm more conflicted. I'm less confident of the ability of doctors to make such a diagnosis and I might have a hope of existing. In that case I can't give a simple rule to follow, but (in the event that I'm unable to express my own wishes in that situation) I believe that my wife would make a reasonable choice and I'd want that choice followed. (Were my wife not herself both an interested party and a medical professional I might be less inclined to say that than I am.) Would you be willing to accept her choice in that situation? Still curious, Ben I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
Post #201,118 by mmoffitt 3/29/05 3:28:06 PM Reply	Dunno about him. But put it in writing, with witnesses along with a statement affirming your good mental health from a third party, and that'd be enough for me. bcnu, Mikem Eine Leute. Eine Welt. Ein F\ufffdhrer. God Bless America.
Post #201,124 by ben_tilly 3/29/05 5:31:12 PM Reply	The statement of good mental health might be a problem... We're all a little crazy here... All the rest I think I just provided. :-) Cheers, Ben I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
Post #201,120 by Arkadiy 3/29/05 4:00:40 PM Reply	I have one last question for you Suppose that you are indeed reduced to the level of a cat. And the cat actually looks like it understands that it's dying, and indicates that it wants to live. Not as Ben Tilly, but as a cat. Would you like me to kill that cat? The words of the detective from "Crime and Punishment" come to my mind: the law never punishes the actual criminal. The "trembling creation" that is locked up or executed is not the superhuman being who commited the crime. (can't find the exact quote at the moment :( ) -- And what are we doing when the two most powerful nations on earth -- America and Israel -- stomp on the elementary rights of human beings? -- letter to the editor from W. Ostermeier, Liechtenstein
Post #201,121 by Another Scott 3/29/05 4:19:35 PM 3/29/05 4:43:03 PM Reply	The problem is that we can keep bodies alive indefinitely. A post on K5 illustrates the [link\|http://www.kuro5hin.org/comments/2005/3/23/204359/812/184#184\|problem with hard and fast rules] about who is alive and who isn't. There, in practice, is some subjectivity in talking about brain death. That's another reason why a person's wishes should be respected. The problem is that we have the technology to keep bodies alive indefinitely. Bodies can be put on heart-lung machines, dialysis machines, etc., and be kept alive for a very, very long time. Most would agree that those are artificial machines, and many would argue that G-tubes for food and drink aren't in the same class. But if a person indicates in "clear and convincing" terms their wishes not to be kept alive by artificial means, I think their intent should be honored. If not, when should such patients be allowed to die? Death comes to everyone. Interfering with the death of those who are in a PVS robs them, and us, of liberty, IMHO. What's your alternative? If there's a chance that a person in a vegetative state might have changed their mind, then their plainly expressed wishes when they were well should be disregarded? Family members should be allowed to violate the plainly expressed wishes of a person past the age of majority? The state should have the right to interfere with a person's dying liberty? I don't think so, but I would like you to elaborate on your opinion on what a just alternative should be. Thanks. [edit:] tyops Cheers, Scott. Edited by Another Scott March 29, 2005, 04:43:03 PM EST Expand All History
Post #201,123 by ben_tilly 3/29/05 5:30:14 PM Reply	The answer is, "Yes" In more detail, I do not consider it a great wrong to kill a cat. It isn't something that I think you should do every day, but I regard killing a cat as far less serious than, say, killing a fully functional person. In particular in this case I'd consider the act justified by the amount of pain and suffering that I'd avoid in people who care about me. (It may be that I'm seriously overestimating how much they care about me and they would suffer no grief at my prolonged lingering. But my belief is that they would and my wishes are based on that belief.) Would you want my wishes respected yet? How many variations on the same question do you need me to answer before you'll give me a final answer on this? Still wondering, Ben I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
Post #201,125 by Arkadiy 3/29/05 5:34:36 PM Reply	Yes, you have me. And, I asked you not "variations", but "degrees" of the same question. -- And what are we doing when the two most powerful nations on earth -- America and Israel -- stomp on the elementary rights of human beings? -- letter to the editor from W. Ostermeier, Liechtenstein
Post #201,148 by tuberculosis 3/29/05 7:59:59 PM Reply	Don't worry Ben, I'll kill you "Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein "This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush
Post #201,163 by ben_tilly 3/29/05 10:27:20 PM Reply	Appreciated. But only if it is time. :-) Carrying out my wishes prematurely would be against my wishes. While I still have wishes, of course. Cheers, Ben I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
Post #201,166 by drewk 3/29/05 10:32:19 PM Reply	My mother was just a little too enthusiastic I asked her about this on the phone a couple of days ago. Said, "I just want to make sure if Jenn ever decides it's time to pull the plug you won't fight with her over it." Mom said, "She'd have to beat me to it." Uhh ... thanks? === Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link\|http://DocHope.com\|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats]. [link\|http://DocHope.com\|http://DocHope.com]
Post #201,173 by Another Scott 3/29/05 10:46:04 PM Reply	:-)
Post #201,216 by Silverlock 3/30/05 8:49:23 AM Reply	Did you forget her birthday or something? :) ----------------------------------------- "In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for. As for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." -- H. L. Mencken Support our troops, Impeach Bush. D. D. Richards
Post #201,169 by broomberg 3/29/05 10:38:51 PM Reply	I'm a bit more extreme I'm in agreement with Ben here, but actually I'd take it a bit further. If I'm deemed in an irreversable coma, or if I'm merely in one for over a year, kill me. Get it over with. This means even if there is brain activity. For all you know, my dreams are horrible nightmares, and I'd rather have nothingness than take a chance.
Post #201,170 by boxley 3/29/05 10:41:22 PM Reply	it all boils down to is there more after death? and you dont know unless you die. crap shoot or anal retention, you choose, thanx, bill All tribal myths are true, for a given value of "true" Terry Pratchett [link\|http://boxleys.blogspot.com/\|http://boxleys.blogspot.com/] Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 48 years. meep questions, help? [link\|mailto:pappas@catholic.org\|email pappas at catholic.org]
Post #201,358 by Ashton 3/31/05 5:52:28 AM Reply	.. to be or not to be?___to coin a phrase ANd whether it's the Bardos or the Xians' deliciously-fantasized vats of boiling oil or an absence of ..to sleep, perchance to dream! -- clearly this is >the LAST Question you'd EVER want a fucking committee to answer For you.< (Unless yer a collectivist like marlowe, My Gramma and these bloody sanctimonious Neoconmen. Redundant to state, of course - they're psychos by inspection) Whole fucking country is driving itself Rushhannity-mouth Disneyland Wacko. Boring bunch of twits to boot - the final insult to any intelligent life left.
Post #201,171 by drewk 3/29/05 10:43:55 PM Reply	Pretty much with you on that one My mother agrees with us, too. Keep in mind that my mother had polio as a child and has used crutches ever since. She knows more about being disabled than most people discussing this. And she says if anything ever happens that will leave her in the same condition as Christopher Reeve was, she'd rather not make it. Conscious, fully-functioning mind, but complete physical disability, she doesn't want to live with. I'm not sure I'd want that, but if it ever happens I want to be able to make that choice for myself. === Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link\|http://DocHope.com\|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats]. [link\|http://DocHope.com\|http://DocHope.com]
Post #201,152 by boxley 3/29/05 8:26:08 PM Reply	the important part is why should Ark have any input at all? nobodys bidness but you and your wife, your siblings and parents didnt live with you during the event so why the hell should they have any input after you are damaged, much less complete elected strangers. What needs to happen here is to pass a law that can find a better method than starvation without being proactive in hastening death. How to do that is the trick. Now maybe a nice shot prepared and handed to the guardian, so they have to do it themselves, no surrogates, their concience, ass, etc. thanx, bill All tribal myths are true, for a given value of "true" Terry Pratchett [link\|http://boxleys.blogspot.com/\|http://boxleys.blogspot.com/] Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 48 years. meep questions, help? [link\|mailto:pappas@catholic.org\|email pappas at catholic.org]
Post #201,377 by Arkadiy 3/31/05 9:06:40 AM Reply	I should not. Ben was testing what it would take to have me do his bidding as the executor of his will. -- And what are we doing when the two most powerful nations on earth -- America and Israel -- stomp on the elementary rights of human beings? -- letter to the editor from W. Ostermeier, Liechtenstein
Post #201,117 by mmoffitt 3/29/05 3:26:28 PM Reply	We have to right to pretend to work. And they have the right to pretend to pay us. bcnu, Mikem I work. You work. He/She works. We work. You work. They profit.

Welcome to IWETHEY!