Case (
case) wrote in
fandomsecrets2014-08-13 06:38 pm
[ SECRET POST #2780 ]
⌈ Secret Post #2780 ⌋
Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.
01.

__________________________________________________
02.

__________________________________________________
03.

__________________________________________________
04.

__________________________________________________
05.

__________________________________________________
06. [repeat]
__________________________________________________
07.

__________________________________________________
08.

__________________________________________________
09.

__________________________________________________
10.

__________________________________________________
11.

__________________________________________________
12.

Notes:
Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 034 secrets from Secret Submission Post #397.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 1 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

no subject
no subject
In philosophy class, I learned about babies born with Down syndrome, many of whom have issues with their digestive tracts. Surgery to fix their digestive tracts can be relatively simple, insofar as surgery on an infant can ever be called "simple," but many parents don't want to have and raise children with Down syndrome. Hospitals are quite insistent on not killing, so they won't do anything to a baby with Down syndrome who has no digestive issues--but back in the '70s, they were quite willing to do nothing at all, and let an unwanted baby with Down syndrome and digestive issues die slowly in terribly pain. After all, they weren't killing the baby themselves, were they? (See "Active and Passive Euthanasia" by James Rachels.)
Obviously, this is a very different consideration than what we're talking about in this thread--a clear decision not to act when someone WILL be harmed, rather than not acting when someone MAY be harmed. And this certainly doesn't mean killing everyone who gets in your way, like some antiheroes do. But I do think there's a case to be made for pattern recognition when supervillains keep getting free and keep killing again.
no subject
no subject
(Anonymous) 2014-08-17 11:09 am (UTC)(link)I've always said no, so I'm not sure how much this costs or if insurance pays for it. I'm also not sure what all it tests for, I just know that Down Syndrome is the major thing they test for.
Now, knowing the alternative, I see why they ask.
no subject
(Anonymous) 2014-08-13 11:49 pm (UTC)(link)no subject
(Anonymous) 2014-08-14 12:14 am (UTC)(link)no subject
(Anonymous) 2014-08-14 01:24 am (UTC)(link)They're projecting their own morals on what they think a hero should be like, instead of understanding the hero as they are written.
+1
(Anonymous) 2014-08-14 02:12 pm (UTC)(link)Why do some people think that the "hard decisions" are automatically the right ones, anyway?