Saturday
Jul252009
Victory for common sense and decency
Saturday, July 25, 2009 I have the result of the Oxford University online debate - "The NHS should not treat self-inflicted illness" - which I have previously posted about. Following those posts some of you took part in the debate, and many more voted, so I thought you might be interested in the outcome. Here it is:
For 15.2%
Against 84.8%
Now that's what I call a result.
Reader Comments (9)
Yes, but what distresses me is the 15.2%, which includes this lady:
http://www.forces.org/Multimedia_Portal/index.php
I think that the DeVille-Almond video should be seen by the Government, those MPs who voted for a blanket ban, which was the public face of the denormalisation programme and the odious Sir Liam Donaldson, so that they can see the results of their social engineering. If they're not ashamed, then they're not fit to be in office.
The video should be publicised at every opportunity.
I wonder if this "nurse" would also advocate motorists "just having to die" after they had had one motoring accident and then went ahead and drove a car for the second time?
Or how about sportsmen and women, who injure themselves during the course of their sport, or our armed forces, who get injured in battle and then return for another tour of duty?
We have also all heard of staff in hospitals being attacked by drunks and drug addicts, so according this all loving, ever caring "person", they shouldn't return to their job either, in case they are severely injured the next time they are attacked. "They'll just have to die"
She should be fired from her job immediately.
I'm glad I hit the right box after all when voting on the above and am glad to see that sanity prevails, in this instance anyway.
I'd say the 15% against most probably hit For instead of Against in the confused and weaslie way the voting was worded.
Glad to see Nanny was defeated this time round.
The precedents set by this sick form of thought make me cringe.
What a "creepy", thing to say.
I think that it is reasonable to say that the idea that 'people who injure themselves (self infliced injuries) should not be treated by the NHS' was always a non-starter, wasn't it? I mean, how could anyone possibly agree that a person who attempted suicide should just be allowed to die?
I wonder who on earth floated this idea, and what their intentions were? Could it be that whowever-it-was was not expecting to see the motion passed, but was hoping that the margin of defeat would be sufficiently small for them to put in motion a propaganda campaign to justify a plan to deny people who hurt themselves treatment? It makes you think.
With 85% against the motion, I'll bet that there are a lot of health fanatics saying, "Shit!"
It was a good result for all right thinking people and undoubtably good for our cause.
Junican said "I think that it is reasonable to say that the idea that 'people who injure themselves (self infliced injuries) should not be treated by the NHS' was always a non-starter, wasn't it? I mean, how could anyone possibly agree that a person who attempted suicide should just be allowed to die?"
Many people attempt suicide because it seems the only way out of their torment! The NHS systematically ignore many people suffering mental illness of whatever kind and I can only think that it is in the hope that we will eventually go away, one way or another!
To a degree it is a postcode lottery, but when you have problems of depression that are deep seated and you wait over 3 years for any form of counselling, is it any wonder that in that time some people do not at least attempt suicide, some, of course, succeed.
It is, however, a very good result and seems that it must have been voted on by normal, sane thinking people rather than so called 'professionals in the field' and non thinking politicians.
The debate itself was a good thing and I certainly would not condemn those who proposed the subject or who took part in the debate.
The essence of debating is to win regardless of the subject matter and whether you agree with it or not. It does not necessarily reflect the views of the speakers but brings forth arguments and discussion. Had this debate not been proposed there are many people out there who would not know that these type of ideas are being floated or that there are supposed health care workers being paid by our taxes who are no better than Nazis.
The more debates the better and do not pillory the contributors.
Conservative Home are asking for your opinions, including the smoking can. 10.00am post.
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/