Melanie_

Actually, the opposite is true. The doctors see beyond the outward appearance, and recognize that there is a person there, who is worthy of their time and effort. You would have them simply do away with her, because her appearance frightens you.

You are the one who said it doesn't matter what her intelligence is, as long as she looks like a cephalopod she is not worthy of living. That tells me you are only concerned with the outward appearance - hence the reference to "Lictor's standard of superficiality".

So for you, the whole thing is about how she looks. If she doesn't conform to the Lictor standard of superficiality, she is a worthless human being. PS, I notice she's white. In your twisted logic, I'm sure this is relevent, but you haven't brought it up yet. Perhaps your real issue here is that she is damaging to the white gene pool?

American Woman: The challenge, though, is that you and I have a frame of reference to compare it to. We know a different life, we've lived a different life. So when we talk about what we would choose, we measure that life against the life we've always known, and of course it comes up short. But for Juliana and her parents, this is the life they have, and regardless of what we may or may not choose, they are choosing to try to give her the best life possible.

And if she doesn't end up on the cover of Vogue or Maxim, her life isn't worth living?

I don't know. Truthfully, I don't know. I don't live her life, and I am thankful for that. Would I choose the life I have over hers? Absolutely. She would probably choose a different life for herself, too, if she could. But it is her life, and there seems to be love and joy in it, along with the pain and uncertainty. I've been reading her family's blog, and it is full of hope. Juliana Wetmore

No, she hasn't chosen to live. She may very well choose to die someday, or she may continue on with her life. It will be her choice then; right now, as her father says in the video, it is their choice, and it is a hard burden to bear. But your rationale is that she is offensive for you to look at, so she should die. Surprisingly enough, this isn't about you.

There. Thats what I really wanted to say, but somehow I use too many words. Thanks, Black Dog!

Lictor, you've made it clear that you would rather be dead than live her life. But apparently she wouldn't, and her parents are committed to keeping her alive. They are giving her as normal a life as possible - admittedly difficult, but it is her life, the only one she gets, and she is living it. Neither one of us really has the power to play god or satan in this scenario, but I support her right to choose to live as fully as she is capable. This brings us back to the original topic, the right to choose. Lictor is advocating mandatory abortions of fetuses that don't match a certain criteria, and disputes Juliana's parents' right to choose whether to terminate a pregnancy or not. We've debated prenatal screening in several previous threads, but again, for me it boils down to making an informed choice, which is what her parents did.

Interesting that you are suggesting I am cruel, when you had this to say... If you read my post clearly, I said her condition can be fixed, to a degree; she has had many surgeries, and will likely have many more. She's not ever going to look like the typical person walking down the street, or be free from some sort of medical interventions. That doesn't mean she should just be done away with. You aren't there, you aren't part of her life, and you can't judge whether or not it is a life worth living. You want to play god, and decide who is worthy of life and who isn't; I don't think you are qualified to make that decision - for her, or for anyone else.

From all I've seen and read, minus your sensationalistic posts, Juliana Wetmore's "defects" are physical, and can be fixed, at least to a degree. I've known someone with Treacher Collins Syndrome, and like Juliana, it was a physical defect that required surgery, but she was fully capable of contributing to society and leading a meaningful life. Her biggest barrier, of course, is when judgmental assholes make deliberately rude comments about what she looks like, as if she is obligated to meet their standard of physical attraction.

Well put, Shwa.

I don't understand. Won't they need to construct roads in order to construct a hydro line? Either way, there will be damage to the ecosystem, which at this point is almost untouched.

What specific natural medicines are you concerned about, bjre? As an example, Canada is full of black bears, and each of them has a gall bladder worth $1000 or more in the Asian market. Asian bears are becoming endangered, so there is an increasing demand for North American bears. You seem to think freedom means doing what you want, when you want, but the destruction of animals to simply harvest one organ, with no true medicinal value, is not a freedom many Canadians will endorse.

I thought the reason they wanted to go down the west side was because there is already so much infrastructure available there, and the east side is basically wilderness. Wilderness that is difficult to develop, because of all the bogs, marshes, lakes, rivers, etc, so there are very few roads and virtually no settlements other than a handful of First Nations communities along the shore of the lake. Its interesting to find out that UNESCO is supporting the east side option now, though - I thought they were firmly against any development.

If Selinger stays the course, he will be successful as a premier, at least until the next election, and likely beyond. Ashton couldn't have done that, and delegates to the party leadership convention recognized this reality. I don't see a big change happening here in the short term, or even in the long term. Most Manitobans are happy with the staus quo.

Telling a burka-wearing woman that she must appear in public without her burka would be equivalent to telling a typical Canadian woman she must go about in public in just her bra. It would leave her feeling vulnerable and exposed. Banning it would simply mean that some women would never leave their homes, as regardless of what the Koran does or doesn’t say, this is what women have been told it says. The best tool in empowering women to make choices in their lives is to ensure their access to education; we know that the two countries that most promote burkas, Afghanistan and Pakistan, are also actively suppressing women’s education. If a woman is able to read the Koran herself, she is able to see what her religion expects of her. I’m betting we aren’t going to see a lot of second or third generation Muslim Canadians wearing a burka.

I think Selinger will be a better choice for the province, but Ashton would certainly boost the PC's chances in the next election.

You know, when people watch pedophiles in action, on the Internet or in videos, we consider them to also be pedophiles. If God was watching, what does that make Him?

It does matter, though, why the susceptibility exists - perhaps not in terms of setting the vaccine priorities, but certainly in fighting the disease overall. If it can be passed off as just "bad genes", there is not as much urgency in finding ways to protect a given population. But, if it has to do with environmental conditions, there has to be some consideration given to changing those conditions.

I understand that. But this is such a new disease, I don't see how one group could be more vulnerable than another based on purely racial characteristics, and there hasn't been enough time for any conclusive studies to be carried out. The potential impact of environmental conditions makes more sense to me, although I'm certainly not a medical expert - it's pure speculation on my part. Edited for grammar

Another possible explanation, not connected to race... We know that the First Nations communities here in Manitoba were hit hardest with H1N1, but I'm not convinced that it had anything to do with vulnerability based on racial characteristics. I think it had more to do with the abysmal conditions on Northern reserves that the rest of us turn a blind eye to - lack of running water, overcrowding which can lead to transfer of the virus more easily, lack of accessible medical care. When someone comes to the city from a Northern community, they often stay with urban family members, which means that there is an increased risk for transferring the virus within the urban First Nations communities. It makes sense, then, to immunize those who might more easily come into contact with the virus.

If anyone suspects a child is being abused, they have an obligation to report. Its not up to individuals to investigate, and sometimes people make allegations that turn out to be incorrect. If they make the allegation in good faith, they are protected from prosecution. Its better to have a false allegation than to allow a child to continue to be abused and do nothing.

This is pure speculation. You have no idea what this guy was actually thinking, you are just making it up as you go along. Maybe they will have an inquest to find out the truth, but until then we don't know.

Good to see you back, PocketRocket!