Robertson is ...

[Butters 0]

Quote

How many of you who are bashing Robertson have actually had to take care of an Alzheimers Patient on a daily basis? I don't mean you know someone who has alzheimers, I mean you have had to change their diapers, deal with their moodiness, fed them, cleaned shit off the wall that they threw, cleaned up puke etc. every single day for years while at the same time your "loved one" has no idea who you are. I'm not defending Robertson, I'm just saying that until you have walkied in another persons shoes, don't be so quick to judge.

I'm not "bashing" his idea, I'm "bashing" him because his idea doesn't align with his preaching.

"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

[wmw999 2,123]

I'd like to see more people whose views don't line up conveniently. It's what makes us able to talk to each other, and join for common good.

If we can only talk to people who agree with us on everything, well, that kind of sucks.

I'm all for anything that makes it to where we have to actually think about our values, our actions, and our relationships with others. And internal contradictions do that.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Butters 0]

Quote

I'd like to see more people whose views don't line up conveniently.

There is a difference between views that don't line up conveniently and not practicing what you preach.

"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

[wmw999 2,123]

And maybe, for him, this is a step in re-evaluating what he preaches.

At least he's not telling people to divorce their sick spouses early to preserve ALL their assets. To me, that's worse. Really.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[grimmie 174]

http://www.slate.com/id/2303989/?GT1=38001

[billvon 2,402]

I disagree with the guy on almost everything, but honestly - calling him an asshole on this? He's talking about an issue that there is no good solution to, only gradations of bad solutions.

Once someone's mind is gone _they_ are gone. You have a responsibility to make them comfortable, but the person you once loved, lived with, supported is no longer there.

Does that mean it's OK to get divorced? If the other person is still aware enough to take comfort from being with the husband, then probably not. If the other person has become completely disconnected from reality then from her perspective it doesn't matter much any more.

[Butters 0]

Quote

I disagree with the guy on almost everything, but honestly - calling him an asshole on this?

Where did I call him an asshole? He made a statement that contradicted the religion that he preaches ... I didn't call him an asshole for this statement, I implied he was being hypocritical.

"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

[billvon 2,402]

>Where did I call him an asshole?

Sorry, was responding to other people in the thread (yours was just the first.)

[quade 3]

Quote

>Where did I call him an asshole?
Sorry, was responding to other people in the thread (yours was just the first.)

Yeah, I called him an asshole and he is.

It's like any one of a number of other people that have the attention of a mass of people yet give out horrific words of "wisdom" like a vaccine will give a person autism or make them mentally retarded. Somebody else is going to take that and run with it and as a result, people are going to suffer.

Robertson saying what he's said will result in more suffering, not less.

For that, he is truly an asshole.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[freethefly 6]

How awful that any person would wish to leave a loved one simply because the persons mind has gone blank. They are still a human. Would you sever ties with a parent, brother, or sister if their mind was washed of memory? I would hope not. I would hope that love and compassion is above all else and that a person would remain with a sick loved one until the end.

"...And once you're gone, you can't come back
When you're out of the blue and into the black."
Neil Young

[masterrig 1]

Quote

And maybe, for him, this is a step in re-evaluating what he preaches.

At least he's not telling people to divorce their sick spouses early to preserve ALL their assets. To me, that's worse. Really.

Wendy P.

Maybe, had he prefaced his statement with the idea he was re-evaluating what he preaches, it may not have come across as it did. (?)


Chuck

[billvon 2,402]

>How awful that any person would wish to leave a loved one simply because
>the persons mind has gone blank. They are still a human.

No, they're not. A body without a mind is just a shell. A human mind, no matter what the vessel it is in, is the defining characteristic of a human.

>I would hope that love and compassion is above all else and that a person
>would remain with a sick loved one until the end.

I've made it clear to my family that once my mind is irretrievably gone I don't want them to expend any effort keeping me around.

[quade 3]

Quote

I've made it clear to my family that once my mind is irretrievably gone I don't want them to expend any effort keeping me around.

The difference being you've made those arrangements beforehand. If you've set up a DNR type deal ahead of time, that's awesome. Everybody knows what to expect ahead of time.

My fear with Robertson is that Mrs. Jones forgets the name of one of her 12 grandkids once and Mr. Jones, who otherwise would have cared for her for years, divorces her and she ends up homeless because Robertson said it was ok to ditch people.

The advice turns compassionate people heartless.

That doesn't help anybody.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[RonD1120 58]

Quote

Article

Quote

"I know it sounds cruel, but if he's going to do something, he should divorce her and start all over again, but make sure she has custodial care and somebody looking after her," Robertson said.
...
"If you respect that vow, you say 'til death do us part,'" Robertson said during the Tuesday broadcast. "This is a kind of death."

Such a caring Christian. Since this is a kind of death does that mean euthanasia is okay for alzheimer's patients?

You missed the point. The options were adultery or divorce. The latter is the better choice.

The better choice would be not to commit adultery and take care his ailing wife. You know, til death do us part.

How would you choose if your wife had Alzheimer's?

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[billvon 2,402]

>My fear with Robertson is that Mrs. Jones forgets the name of one of her
>12 grandkids once . . .

Yes, that's an extreme. One could make the equally extreme argument that if a woman is 100% brain dead, and in a persistently vegetative state, her husband should not be allowed to see anyone until her body is dead, even if it take 25 years,

Most cases, of course, are in between - and you're not an asshole if you draw the line somewhere between.

>The advice turns compassionate people heartless.

That's as valid as claiming that Obamacare will turn people heartless by having death boards that will kill your grandma.

[RonD1120 58]

Quote

Quote

... then I realized that 2000 years ago, an Alzheimers sufferer would probably be stoned to death for being filled with evil spirits.

Maybe. Alzheimer's is mostly a disease of the old, so when life expectancies were less, it wasn't so common.

Alzheimer's is considered early onset, 40 - 60 years of age.

There are other forms of dementia. Senile, cardiovascular, vascular, etc.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[quade 3]

Quote

>My fear with Robertson is that Mrs. Jones forgets the name of one of her
>12 grandkids once . . .
Yes, that's an extreme. One could make the equally extreme argument that if a woman is 100% brain dead, and in a persistently vegetative state, her husband should not be allowed to see anyone until her body is dead, even if it take 25 years,
Most cases, of course, are in between - and you're not an asshole if you draw the line somewhere between.
>The advice turns compassionate people heartless.
That's as valid as claiming that Obamacare will turn people heartless by having death boards that will kill your grandma.

Except, there never were any death panels. However, there will always be people that turn from compassion to heartlessness.

This isn't helpful.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[freethefly 6]

Quote

No, they're not. A body without a mind is just a shell. A human mind, no matter what the vessel it is in, is the defining characteristic of a human.

Then, maybe [?], the severely retarded or autistic should be euthanized. I would hope no one agrees with that.
If, by chance, it becomes possible to transplant a human brain or characteristics into any given animal, would you call that animal human? Brings the H.G. Wells novel, 'The Island of Dr. Moreau' and Prendick's struggle to comprehend to mind.
I cannot agree that a human is defined only by a healthy mind (presuming that is what you mean.) Does ones DNA change when the mind is wiped of their past? No, it does not. There is more to use than just knowing our past and present. If the mind is not yet completely dead, they are still here.

Quote

I've made it clear to my family that once my mind is irretrievably gone I don't want them to expend any effort keeping me around.

I can agree with this, up to a point. If my mind is dead, pull the plug. However, for me, Alzheimer does not fit the criteria.

"...And once you're gone, you can't come back
When you're out of the blue and into the black."
Neil Young

[Amazon 7]

Quote

I disagree with the guy on almost everything, but honestly - calling him an asshole on this? He's talking about an issue that there is no good solution to, only gradations of bad solutions.

Once someone's mind is gone _they_ are gone. You have a responsibility to make them comfortable, but the person you once loved, lived with, supported is no longer there.

Does that mean it's OK to get divorced? If the other person is still aware enough to take comfort from being with the husband, then probably not. If the other person has become completely disconnected from reality then from her perspective it doesn't matter much any more.

Poor ole. Pat.... just one step away from meeting his maker... I wonder how that is going to go for him.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

And maybe, for him, this is a step in re-evaluating what he preaches.

At least he's not telling people to divorce their sick spouses early to preserve ALL their assets. To me, that's worse. Really.

Wendy P.

Maybe, had he prefaced his statement with the idea he was re-evaluating what he preaches, it may not have come across as it did. (?)


Chuck

I was thinking it sounded about one step away from retroactive abortion.. it seems there is not so much difference.... for those without a "mind". I thought ole Pat was all about the soul.

[masterrig 1]

Quote

Quote

Quote

And maybe, for him, this is a step in re-evaluating what he preaches.

At least he's not telling people to divorce their sick spouses early to preserve ALL their assets. To me, that's worse. Really.

Wendy P.

Maybe, had he prefaced his statement with the idea he was re-evaluating what he preaches, it may not have come across as it did. (?)


Chuck

I was thinking it sounded about one step away from retroactive abortion.. it seems there is not so much difference.... for those without a "mind". I thought ole Pat was all about the soul.

Anymore... you never know what Pat Robertson is 'about'!


Chuck

[jclalor 12]

Quote

Alzheimer's is considered early onset, 40 - 60 years of age.

Completely false. 95% occurs after the age of 65, less that 1% before the age of 50.

http://www.alz.org/alzheimers_disease_what_is_alzheimers.asp

[wmw999 2,123]

From what he said, I thought he meant that it's considered the early onset version when it starts from 40-60.

Of course, often it starts before 60 but isn't at all diagnosable until well after that.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[quade 3]

Quote

From what he said, I thought he meant that it's considered the early onset version when it starts from 40-60.

Of course, often it starts before 60 but isn't at all diagnosable until well after that.

Wendy P.

Well, it probably starts at conception since it has a tendency to be passed along genetic lines.
http://www.alzheimer.ca/english/disease/causes-heredity.htm

Perhaps we can include it in pre-wedding blood tests and advise people they shouldn't get married to begin with?

Huzzah for the new eugenics! All hail our heartless bastard overlords.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[jclalor 12]

I took his reply to someone who was stating that it is a disease of the old and that he disagreed. Ron then replied that it was an early onset disease that started at the age of 40-60.