Your tax dollars is going to help this man

[HappySqurriel]

rocketpig said:

HappySqurriel said:

My entire point was regardless of the decision the government is making they're implicitly making life and death calls ...

In a world where people are dying all the time due to lack of access to healthcare, are you comfortable with young children dying so that a violent sexual offender can add a couple of years to their life?

You're using an abstract argument and it's coming off as a strawman. What "children" are dying? Who is making the decision to kill them?

In the case we're talking about here, who gets to make this call? What criminals are exempted and which are not? Who decides THAT? Who is worth saving and who is not? What is the dollar cutoff?

There are a hundred questions here and there just aren't any good answers. As I said earlier, it's a bitter pill to swallow but it's one we have to choke down lest we let the government make decisions they shouldn't have the right to make. Criminals or not, those are human beings. And those human beings deserve rights, just like the rest of us.

Its not about "which criminals" are allowed to die, it is about setting reasonable limits to the extent that the state will go to in order to save the life of someone. It doesn't matter whether someone is a criminal or not, being that the state has limited resources available to satisfy the needs of everyone, spending $800,000 to save the life of anyone is a foolish thing to do; and if it is a regular occurance, will ensure that the monetary resources are not there to meet other people's needs.