Health

Shock Vid: Mother Wants the Right to Euthanize ‘Severely Disabled’ Children — And ‘90%’ of Dr. Phil’s Audience Agrees

Canadian Mother Wants to Euthanize Severely Disabled Adult Children

Janet and Jeffery Corriveau suffer from a rare genetic condition that has their mother wanting to euthanize them.

Would you euthanize your disabled children, especially your adult children? One Canadian woman is fighting to do just that.

Dr. Phil recently featured Annette Corriveau, on his show. She is the mother of Janet and Jeffery, two severely disabled adults who she says if they had the ability to chose for themselves, they would “opt for suicide.” Since they can’t communicate though, she wants the right to end their lives herself.

(Related: Should man with paralyzing stroke but in tact mind be given the ‘right’ to die?)

Janet, 43, and Jeffery, 42, started off as healthy, seemingly normal children, but Corriveau told Canada’s Global News in an interview last month, they became particularly unruly and hard to control at age 5 and 6. From there, their condition began to deteriorate, losing speech and motor skills. Eventually, a hospital found Corriveau and her husband both carried a recessive gene for a trait that would not allow their children to process sugars. The results of this genetic illness – Sanfilippo syndrome — can include severe mental retardation, blindness, nerve damage to the point of being wheelchair bound, seizures and early death. The symptoms of the disease begin from age 2 to 8 and conditions worsen from there.

Canadian Mother Wants to Euthanize Severely Disabled Adult Children

According to Global News, both Janet and Jeffery have feeding tubes, and Corriveau believes they cannot see as they don’t respond to stimulus. Both have been in an institution since before the age of 10. Global News has more from Corriveau on her children’s condition and why she believes they would want to die rather than continue suffering:

“They wouldn’t like to live like this,” she says. “My children were full of life. When they were young, before this disease took hold…I just don’t believe that they would want to stay alive the way they are.”

[...]

Annette says no one can understand unless they watch — as she did- as her children slowly succumbed to this rare genetic disorder.

“The saying, ‘walk in another man’s moccasins’? Don’t judge. Unless you’ve been there, don’t judge,” she says. “This is no life. For anyone.”

During her appearance with Dr. Phil, the doctor  polled  the audience to see whether they agree with her right to euthanize the children or not. Dr. Phil estimates the audience is 90 percent for mercy killing of those in conditions such as Janet and Jeffery:

 

During the show, Dr. Phil clarifies that Corriveau is asking for a more “humane” way to let her children die versus taking away away their feeding tubes and letting them starve. He asks Corriveau, “If you were going to do it, do you now wish you had done it 25 years ago?” Corriveau responds she would have wanted to do it when Jeffery first received his feeding tube 17 years ago. Janet went on a feeding tube five years ago. Corriveau explains:

“After 25 years of watching them just exist, it’s time that somebody did something,” she continues. “I didn’t want to be the one to do it, but I’m here,” she adds.

Watch Global Mail’s more than 15 minute interview with Corriveau here. The interview also includes Robert Latimer, a father who killed his disabled daughter Tracy via carbon monoxide poisoning in 1993.

Canadian Mother Wants to Euthanize Severely Disabled Adult Children

Alex Schadenberg, executive director and international chair for the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition, finds this feature by Global Mail “dangerously one-sided”. He writes it is a “serious attempt by the Canadian media to re-write the history of the Latimer case and to justify euthanasia for children with disabilities. In his post, Schadenberg shares the thoughts of Steve Passmore, a man with cerebral palsy who opposes euthanasia. Passmore said:

“Many people in society view people with disabilities as having lives that can be euthanized, like a kept pet, because of pain and suffering, that he lives with everyday.”

[...]

“this story clearly shows the prejudice that people with disabilities experience in society and the threat that euthanasia and assisted suicide place on the lives of people with disabilities.”

Schadenberg states that of course cases such as these cannot be taken lightly, but if parents are allowed the right to kill disabled children, it opens the door for a “a whole new debate which would focus on who lives and who dies.”

The Blaze has covered a number of articles over the past two years on this subject, from the British who said it would be “loving” for a mother to smother a disabled child (and advocates aborting disabled children, too), to the bioethicicsts who suggest killing someone with no autonomy left isn’t morally wrong.

Comments (292)

1 2 3 ... 7
  • TommyJH54
    Posted on April 17, 2012 at 7:16pm

    “They wouldn’t like to live like this,” she says. “My children were full of life. When they were young, before this disease took hold…I just don’t believe that they would want to stay alive the way they are.”

    . . . disease as in old age also? Dr. Phil needs to have a good talk with this woman.

    Report Post » TommyJH54  
    • minorityconservative2
      Posted on April 17, 2012 at 7:31pm

      He supported her so how can he talk to her about doing the right thing when he is just as wrong as her?

      Report Post »  
    • NHwinter
      Posted on April 17, 2012 at 7:43pm

      The majority of the audience supported her. They may come to regret that when they are older and their children do not want to take care of them and believe killing them would be sooooo much easier. Sick attitude. I believe God wants us to care for the infirmed and learn what service really means. I think Jesus stressed serving as He washed the feet of His disciples.

      Report Post » NHwinter  
    • ViewPointtt
      Posted on April 17, 2012 at 9:55pm

      Yes, Dr. Phil agrees with the homicidal mom. Did you not notice how he cued the audience? Is it any wonder that the audience voted so strongly in favor immediately after Phil said to the exasperated mom, “You’re just being compassionate.” If some of the 90% were sheepish, or undecided before this cue, they may have simply responded to the cue with inadequate forethought… after all, if Dr. Phil says it’s ok and the compassionate thing to do, well, then it must be so… right?

      We are being slowly and malevolently indoctrinated into accepting eugenics as a natural and necessary course. When they dared to promote the heart-wrenching social benefit of after-birth-abortion (legally condoned murder of perfectly healthy children up to 3 years of age), the rest is now going to be much easier to swallow. The first step is just to put it on the table for mass consideration, spontaneous reaction, and instinctive rejection… then it is reintroduced at a later point…. with less reaction, less rejection… reintroduced repeatedly until the gradually lessened reaction and rejection becomes acceptance… until the final step of embracement with absolute, righteous conviction.

      Report Post »  
    • cheeky
      Posted on July 4, 2012 at 12:36pm

      Dr. Phil is as much an egotist as she is. This is all about her, not her children. She cannot begin to walk in her children’s shoes, just as I cannot walk in my healthy children’s shoes. I would never presume how my children feel, and they are healthy, functioning communicative girls.This woman has no idea what her children are feeling. She cannot say when they are happy, sad, or otherwise because it is all subjective to what their experience is.

      Report Post »  
  • republic2011
    Posted on April 17, 2012 at 7:16pm

    So why does the left always spit on our soldiers for doing their job overseas? Can’t we look at what the soldiers are doing as “putting those poor radical muslims out of their misery”? I mean, no one should live with those demons, right? Of course the left want to call them imperialists and murderers. But go ahead and euthanize unborn children, disabled people, etc. What’s next? Another Margaret Sanger coming along and euthanizing poor people and non-whites? Don‘t think it can’t happen.

    Report Post »  
  • possom
    Posted on April 17, 2012 at 7:16pm

    I‘m stay’in outta this one!

    Report Post » possom  
  • The Gooch
    Posted on April 17, 2012 at 7:15pm

    Free speech means goons get to spout off, also. And with no fear fear for loss of life of property. I’m not defending the words… yes, it’s stupid a comment. Careful what you wish upon others….

    Report Post »  
  • whatthecrazy
    Posted on April 17, 2012 at 7:15pm

    Seriously???????????????

    Report Post »  
  • GUYFROMMAINE
    Posted on April 17, 2012 at 7:15pm

    I wonder if 90% of the audience supports what Hitler did, because he also got rid of the mentally handicapped. Also, this mom does not want us to judge her, yet she absolutely knows what her children want. “Mother knows best” sounds a bit too scary coming from her.

    Report Post »  
  • RebelYell1862
    Posted on April 17, 2012 at 7:13pm

    Once they have their foot in the door, where does it stop? This will only progress to something else. A human life is precious, there is a soul at sake.

    Report Post » RebelYell1862  
    • RebelYell1862
      Posted on April 17, 2012 at 7:19pm

      Pardon me, I meant “at stake”.

      Report Post » RebelYell1862  
    • kralspaces
      Posted on April 17, 2012 at 8:44pm

      Then why to we kill each other at will? It like Hunger Games.

      Report Post » kralspaces  
    • Matrix22
      Posted on April 17, 2012 at 11:29pm

      Kral – please explain when we kill, “at will”? If you’re talking about crimes of hatred or passion, that’s murder and we punish for it. If it‘s war you’re talking about, then I can assure you (as a military member), we’re not “killing at will.” We are ordered to defend our country and follow our commanders. Capital punishment is reserved for heinous crimes and only done after a trial. If you’re talking about abortion – well, I have no excuse for that. So yeah, I’m just trying to figure out when exactly we kill “at will”?

      Report Post »  
    • ChevalierdeJohnstone
      Posted on May 2, 2012 at 11:35am

      The slippery slope argument does not work here. That argument is appropriate only when talking about creating a uniform rule, such as a government power. But individuals can make informed judgments. Those of you making blanket statements had better imagine that the person you love most in the world is being kept alive by medical technology and constantly screaming in agony in between begging you to make the pain stop. What are you going to do? If you simply take the technology away they will take 1 week or more to die of thirst, meanwhile in even more pain. What are you going to do?

      Report Post »  
    • ChevalierdeJohnstone
      Posted on May 2, 2012 at 11:36am

      Well the child‘s soul certainly isn’t at stake. Death of the body does not do anything to the soul.

      Report Post »  
  • sndrman
    Posted on April 17, 2012 at 7:13pm

    my heart goes out to all the 2 wheelchair bound,the mother which mother would willingly do that?the left,gov’t socialist have no issue doing it….i once saw a movie maybe flat liners where mediacl students did pranks where they would comatose a person through meds then bring him/her back. but after a while the person would go comatose but was fully awake “inside” the eys were open but would mimic coma/death but the person was fully aware of his/her surroundings. it’s been over 20+ years since i saw this might have been a movie or an episode of some show….but kinda fitting what if these 2 are fully awake and aware inside? ending their lives doesn’t sit well with me.

    Report Post »  
  • minorityconservative2
    Posted on April 17, 2012 at 7:11pm

    You are sick.

    Report Post »  
  • RIGHTHOOK
    Posted on April 17, 2012 at 7:09pm

    You are one demented, nauseating POS. Euthanizing people like you with disgraceful remarks, thoughts and deranged minds has credence. May our paths never cross.

    Report Post » RIGHTHOOK  
    • RIGHTHOOK
      Posted on April 18, 2012 at 9:24am

      The ‘post’ I was replying to was so vile and cruel that The Blaze omitted it apparently. Albeit my comment may have been a bit harsh it has no relation to any post and appears to be directed at article. Might as well eliminate my reply also. Nonetheless very pathetic story. Sad……

      Report Post » RIGHTHOOK  
  • Mr Galt
    Posted on April 17, 2012 at 7:08pm

    I’ll agree to euthanize the disabled, when “society” agrees to euthanize the stupid, FIRST.

    Report Post »  
    • whatthecrazy
      Posted on April 17, 2012 at 7:16pm

      Sounds fair

      Report Post »  
    • 3monkeysmomma
      Posted on April 17, 2012 at 7:17pm

      that sounds good…except who gets to decide who’s stupid? If you ask your average knee-jerk lib, it’s YOU…and me.

      See you at the FEMA camp……… :-(

      Report Post » 3monkeysmomma  
    • COFemale
      Posted on April 17, 2012 at 7:46pm

      You give them the test.

      You can only save one . You have a woman on her way to Planned Parenthood for an abortion and you have a dog that gets beat by his master once a week, which one do you save? If they say the latter – off with their heads.

      Report Post » COFemale  
    • CatB
      Posted on April 17, 2012 at 8:28pm

      @MR GALT

      Start in Washinton D.C. … seems to attract the stupid .. or that is the only place where the incompetitent can rise to the top.

      Report Post »  
    • imsteph
      Posted on April 18, 2012 at 9:46am

      the problem will be that the left will not have a problem with that…
      and they will deem you and i the stupid because we refuse to toe their party line…

      Report Post » imsteph  
  • Impenitent
    Posted on April 17, 2012 at 7:05pm

    and the socialist utopia of Dachau begins again…

    Report Post »  
  • Ducky 1
    Posted on April 17, 2012 at 7:04pm

    Pure Evil!!!!

    Report Post » Ducky 1  
  • Git-R-Done
    Posted on April 17, 2012 at 7:03pm

    That mother and 90% of the audience have the same mindset as Hitler and Stalin towards the disabled. They think that killing them off would end their suffering.

    Report Post »  
    • 3monkeysmomma
      Posted on April 17, 2012 at 7:14pm

      90% of that audience hasn’t mentally processed anything more intelligent than daytime TV in more than a decade…sadly though, some of them do vote…..

      Report Post » 3monkeysmomma  
    • SnowKalBebes
      Posted on April 17, 2012 at 7:14pm

      “They think that killing them off would end their suffering.”

      Kind of reminds me of the republican debates when everyone cheered because the uninsured would die because of their lack of coverage.

      Be consistent with your rage…stop the hyprocisy

      Report Post »  
    • Git-R-Done
      Posted on April 17, 2012 at 7:55pm

      Snow – Don‘t pretend that your beloved universal healthcare is going to save people’s lives. It‘s all about controlling other people’s medicine, moron. Looks like you‘re trying to find garbage that doesn’t exist.

      Report Post »  
    • kaydeebeau
      Posted on April 18, 2012 at 9:49am

      @ snow…did you watch the same debate that the rest of us did?

      Report Post » kaydeebeau  
  • kickagrandma
    Posted on April 17, 2012 at 7:02pm

    Personally, I vote for euthanizing the mother…. (tongue in cheek, sort of).

    Report Post »  
  • Psychosis
    Posted on April 17, 2012 at 7:01pm

    disgusting

    but, if passed and allowed, i would add one caveat ………………..the parents who want this must also be euthanized

    Report Post » Psychosis  
  • Mark0331
    Posted on April 17, 2012 at 7:00pm

    Eugenics…the ideology of monsters, serial killers, fascists, socialists and communist madmen… and liberal progressive democrats.

    Report Post » Mark0331  
  • Tri-ox
    Posted on April 17, 2012 at 7:00pm

    Liberals have uncontrollable fantasies about murdering children.

    Report Post » Tri-ox  
  • NutterButter79
    Posted on April 17, 2012 at 7:00pm

    And some try to say Eugenics is a conspiracy. Welcome to the future.
    Soon we’ll be breeding superior races of children thanks to genetics.
    Again, isn’t this a bigger story?
    http://revolutioninmedia.com/2012/04/17/why-is-the-government-attacking-whistle-blowers/
    Maybe not. Who knows.

    Report Post » NutterButter79  
  • JP4JOY
    Posted on April 17, 2012 at 6:59pm

    That’s where it starts. Just eliminate the crippled and lame…then maybe the disfigured…then those that are too old…then those who are too sick…is there an end to all that humaneness?

    Report Post » JP4JOY  
  • The Gooch
    Posted on April 17, 2012 at 6:57pm

    Hmm, I just sent an e-mail to my sister about how stupid and dangerous Dr. Phil and his pop ilk can be. This man is not a mental health professional; he is an entertainer. 90% of Dr. Phil’s audience likely weighs more than the average engine block and possess a political and social awareness limited to daytime TV. These are people who are told what to think, not how to think.
    You wanna know when your culture is in trouble? Watch when it turns on the mentally ill and developmentally disabled. It’s all downhill from there, baby.

    Report Post »  
    • jn3t
      Posted on April 17, 2012 at 7:10pm

      To be fair, Dr. Phil does not pretend to be a mental health professional and it is clear that he is an entertainer now. He treats all guests with respect and does not endorse or condemn people‘s moral or immoral decisions because he is an entertainer and that’s not his job. I wouldn’t call him dangerous, as he connects a lot of people who actually need help in improving their lives with those who can help them. He also bring controversial issues to light – this being one of them.

      But during the episode, Dr. Phil did say he could never do what this woman wants to do. I also got the impression that he disagreed with her, and he was even surprised by the audience’s opinions. Either way, as he shed light on this story and it’s something that a lot more people know about now, I maintain that this episode was, overall, beneficial.

      Report Post »  
    • The Gooch
      Posted on April 17, 2012 at 7:33pm

      Au contraire! Dr. Phil DOES dare still present himself as a mental health professional according to a brief search on the scandals and suits connected to his show. And, per other mental health professionals, McGraw practices a dumbed-down, marketable pop psychology. I’m aware of the good doctor as one of my clients happens to be a big fan. McGraw acts as an interventionist and gives advice to some troubled people based on his supposed expertise. That, my friend, is a practicing mental health professional. I base my opinion on my limited experience in seeing him engaging in family and relationship therapy… when he’s not parading around his grandchildren or schilling an Adam Sandler movie. The only other TV personality I find more dangerous and biased than Dr. Phil when it comes to public health is the Pfizer schill, Dr. Oz.
      As for the merit of the show, I do believe the majority audience response exposes more about empathy than any serious consideration on ethics and morality. With the mother speaking, she becomes the perceived victim. Go figure.

      Report Post »  
    • jn3t
      Posted on April 17, 2012 at 7:47pm

      Okay you’re not wrong, but neither am I. There are some semantic issues here. I suppose if you have a PhD in clinical psychology you can be called a mental health professional. Still, he makes no secret that “he retired from practice as a licensed psychologist to devote full time to his educational media platform.” He is retired and does not *practice* anymore. He gives advice (as anyone conceivably could) and then refers many people to practicing professionals.

      You refer to other episodes, such as the infrequent occasions where he discusses a movie or parades his grandchildren around. Sure, sometimes he has lighter episodes. I think he has a right to talk about movie he enjoys – he is an entertainer! It’s his show! And if his family is okay with it, what is it your business to judge if he features his family *on his own show*?

      Report Post »  
    • COFemale
      Posted on April 17, 2012 at 8:12pm

      Gooch you are so full of crap, I don’t know where to begin. Tell me do you watch Dr. Phil daily or are you going on just want others say and form your opinion from hearsay? And before you ask – Yes I do watch Dr. Phil. I record his shows when I can’t be home to watch.

      I can tell you for a fact Dr. Phil is NOT a mental health specialist. He brings those with credentials in that field to his show. He was a psychologist. He has retired from his practice. He is not practicing medicine on his show. He has licensed professionals handle the work that requires a license. Get your statements straight and deal with facts and not your own bias.

      People are just jealous of Dr. Phil’s success and he is making boo coo dollars. He is a !% and probably a Republican, since he was originally from Texas.

      Report Post » COFemale  
    • The Gooch
      Posted on April 17, 2012 at 9:18pm

      This is a public forum that encourages opinion. Along with my 1st Amendment right, that’s all the license I need to bother with voicing my beliefs. Whether you agree with them or not is immaterial to me. I like debate. If you perceive my critique of Dr. Phil as a personal attack upon you, that‘s a logic argument I can’t help you with.
      Dr. Phil is an interventionist. That’s easy enough to establish by, as I said, looking at the scandals that surround his shows & the general mien of the fellow on his “serious” shows. Whether you accept that as a mental health tactic (which it certainly is), once again, does not matter to me.
      I don’t watch Dr. Phil. As I mentioned, I am aware of him thru one of my clients &, also, thru water cooler talk at work. The guy IS a success. I don’t begrudge him that. And it’s my understanding he owes a lot of that success to Oprah Winfrey. Once again, good on him. But why does this allow him to have it both ways? Basically, your defense (& I’m assuming his) is, “I’m not a mental health professional, but I play one on TV.” Okay… & it appears he is no longer licensed, but I know clinical techniques & jargon when I see and hear them. If it walks like a duck….
      I actually DO agree with you: This guy is FAR from professional. He has a hokey appeal comparable to when Barak Obama is playing to a crowd. Apparently, his staff has also engaged in some shenanigans.
      Can we agree you folks are pro-Phil & I am not? Geesh…

      Report Post »  
  • jn3t
    Posted on April 17, 2012 at 6:57pm

    I saw this episode. I was disgusted, especially by the percentage of the audience that sided with this women.

    Report Post »  
    • minorityconservative2
      Posted on April 17, 2012 at 7:17pm

      This just shows the mindset of these people. That mother saw her kids every two months and she is tired of going to see them. She sees no value in them so she treats them as though they have no value. What do people do with things that are of no value? Throw them away. That is exactly what she is doing. Getting rid of the trash is her mindset.

      Report Post »  
  • dont_tax_me_bro
    Posted on April 17, 2012 at 6:55pm

    Its called “culling the herd.”

    Report Post » dont_tax_me_bro  
    • 3monkeysmomma
      Posted on April 17, 2012 at 7:12pm

      If you really want to be frightened, follow the ever changing regulation by the FDA designed to drive small famers out of business…..and then think of the many many many ways that could go wrong.

      Report Post » 3monkeysmomma  
  • ProgressiveDeist267
    Posted on April 17, 2012 at 6:54pm

    To be honest I agree Annette position. But we do have to be more responsible and see what other options are on the table.

    Report Post »  
    • The Gooch
      Posted on April 17, 2012 at 7:16pm

      I’m curious: What is your stance on capital punishment?

      Report Post »  
    • ProgressiveDeist267
      Posted on April 17, 2012 at 7:23pm

      I support the death penalty. There are times many prisoners can better themselves with what they can do in prison like schooling and jobs. However I feel it is a waste of time rehabilitation. Why do you ask?

      Report Post »  
    • SacredHonor1776
      Posted on April 17, 2012 at 7:33pm

      http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005200

      You and the Nazis would agree….

      Report Post »  
    • The Gooch
      Posted on April 17, 2012 at 7:36pm

      I was curious as to whether your convictions had a sense of consistency. You have nothing to prove to me. I was simply curious. Thank you for your time. No disrespect intended.

      Report Post »  
    • ProgressiveDeist267
      Posted on April 17, 2012 at 7:39pm

      Yes and no. Personally I support the right for a person to want to end their lives.

      Report Post »  
    • minorityconservative2
      Posted on April 17, 2012 at 7:45pm

      Sorry to hear you agree with something so horrible and despicable as murder. I thing you are a sicko. Maybe you should think if it were you someone had to make that decision for. Don’t bother telling me that you would want someone to kill you. You have no idea what those people, (garbage to you) feel. You are worth just as much now as you would be if you got in a car accident and had severe brain damage to the point where you would not take care of yourself. These people are worth just as much as they were before the disease took away their abilities as well.

      Report Post »  
    • COFemale
      Posted on April 17, 2012 at 8:16pm

      You can’t even begin to compare capital punishment with euthanasia. These are apples and oranges.

      Capital punishment is the killing of someone who blatantly and willing killed one or more individuals for the hell of it. They are aware of their actions.

      A person who is not of their faculties such as these adults are not aware of their state. Their killing would be killing of innocents. They have no way to protect themselves.

      Report Post » COFemale  
    • ProgressiveDeist267
      Posted on April 17, 2012 at 8:36pm

      I would have to respectfully disagree. You have the right to call me what you want but I do not see myself as a sicko or see these people as trash. As I mentioned in my first post we should also chose other alternatives. However, I feel it should be legal to kill people who would want to commit suicide.

      Report Post »  
    • The Gooch
      Posted on April 17, 2012 at 9:32pm

      One of the posters further along in the queue makes a good point about artificially prolonging life. I firmly believe that some medical intervention becomes inhumane and is far from natural. I work with this population and I see parents who must make some damn hard decisions. There does come a question of quality of life over the number of days a body can be kept breathing and and heart pumping via machines. I draw the line for myself at machine-sustained life. The ugly truth is, much of our medical technology is geared towards sustaining life, not improving it. When you start considering how unnatural some mechanical interventions are, this issue doesn’t seem so black and white. There is a certain greed and denial of mortality that can be witnessed at many a deathbed.
      I am biased in that I feel it is noble to help those, who thru no fault of their own, are in need of our help. My compassion quickly dissipates for those who choose to fail.

      Report Post »  
    • minorityconservative2
      Posted on April 17, 2012 at 11:51pm

      @progressive
      They are not choosing to die. They were children when they got sick. My mother is a horrible person and she is the last one on earth I would want making decisions for me. Even if she was great though, she and I might disagree very strongly. So you can’t say those people want to die. Where I come from when someone wants to die they are taken to a hospital and counseled. People have head problems that make them want to die at times and that is no reason to say go ahead lets kill you. There are no alternatives to keeping someone alive or killing them so not sure what you mean. But if you are talking about different ways to kill them, well it is still murder.

      @gooch
      I think you are right as far as not keeping a brain dead person on life support as far as much testing has been done to make sure, but if they only need a feeding tube then that is not the same thing. We all need sustenance to survive so not being able to feed one’s self is not a reason to say they are a vegetable.

      Report Post »  
    • RobertWW
      Posted on April 18, 2012 at 4:29am

      @Progressivedeist267

      No one, and I mean NO ONE has the right to end a life, period, except for the Creator of this Universe. You don‘t know what’s going on inside their heads, and neither does their mother. She is only projecting her desires onto them. She has no desire to “end’ their pain, she only, selfishly, wants to end hers. And spiritual morons like Dr. Phil only enables that insane type of thinking.

      “Whoever sheds man’s blood, by man his blood is shed, for in the image of Elohim has He made man.
      (Genesis 9:6 The Scriptures 1998+)

      “When you saw a thief, you were pleased with him, And you take part with adulterers.
      (Psalms 50:18 The Scriptures 1998+)
      The same goes for murderers, and killing an innocent person is still murder, however much “mercy” is claimed.

      “…do not fear those who [can] kill the body but are unable to kill the soul. But rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in Gehenna (hellfire).
      (Matthew 10:28 The Scriptures 1998+)

      Report Post »  
  • barber2
    Posted on April 17, 2012 at 6:53pm

    Welcome to the New Age of Science and Big Brother .

    Report Post »  
    • The Gooch
      Posted on April 17, 2012 at 6:59pm

      This happened before. And the world swore, “Never again.”

      Report Post »  
1 2 3 ... 7

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love