The English baby that the British health plan want to kill should tell everyone a lot

SO the state does? I didn't say they OWNED him, I said they were in the best position to make a decision regarding their child when he could not make one for himself. That doesn't imply ownership, that implies conservatorship/guardianship. Not custody. You have custody of property, conservatorship/guardianship of a person

 

No the State does not, the state pays for a independent judge to represent him.

 

I do not want someone with conflict of interests to represent me, thank you. If you were trained as a Judge I might well get you to represent me, same as I would pay a solicitor to represent me, not my mum!

 

So, no chance and " a very little chance", if you were the parents, had the resources, what would you do?

 

If I was the parents I would do anything, however, that does not mean it is in the best interest of my child.

 

That's right!

Charlie Gard Granted Permanent Legal Residence in US for Treatment, but UK Doctors Still Would Rather He Be Forced To Die

The judge-appointed expert attempted to explain to his UK doctors why he thought treatment was viable and should be attempted-- but they still want to pull the plug without all that "first do no harm" baggage weighting them down.

The digest from the Daily Mail:

Charlie has been given permanent US residence so he can fly there for treatment Connie Yates and Chris Gard release photo of Charlie 'looking' at a colourful toy

Charlie Gard's doctors are still convinced that he should die, now.

The medics failed to be persuaded by American neuroscientist Dr Michio Hirano

Dr Hirano had spent five and a half hours trying to talk round Charlie's doctors

PARENTS, not the State, should make this decision.

 

The judge is part of the apparatus of the state.

 

I hold a law degree, and I'm taking the bar on Tuesday-Thursday.
So you'd rather the state hold your power of attorney, rather than someone close to you who actually knows your wishes?

 

Slight chance is better than death. If your personal situation was similar to this, slight chance or death, or just death, what would YOU choose for yourself?

 

I don't think that will actually help. He hasn't been granted citizenship, just residence, so its not like the US government can intervene. If they naturalized his parents and he (which they can't actually do as it would violate equal protection. Do it for one and you'll be doing it for all. Not what's best for the nation) there would be an argument but this is just a gesture. A welcome one, I'm sure, and one useful if he can get released from these murderous ducks, but just a gesture.

 

That's easy, I have already chose it, death.

 

Why?

 

In the UK a judge is independent of the government, which is what we mean by state in this context.

 

Charlie Gard apparently has no right to choose.
What passes for a progressive movement these days is really just a death cult.

 

Charlie has no wishes. If i was mentally incapacitated in matters of life and death I certainly would not want my mother to decide. Again it is not the State, it is an independent judge.

 

I see, you think someone should have the right to make decisions for me because they are related to me?

What qualifies a relative to make the decision?

 

So you're saying you prefer death over a chance at life? Just "**** it, shoot me in the head," death?

 

Independent as in not elected, sure, but that doesn't mean they are not part of the apparatus of the state. That's the whole point of a judicial proceeding.

 

What do you call life?

 

Independent as in they can make decisions against the interests of the government.

 

Its a way of discussing the issue, a metaphor. Maybe you just dislike or distrust your mother. Parents generally make such decisions (medical decisions) for their children until age of majority. See above, the judge is part of the state. Not elected but still part of the apparatus.

 

Continuing to exist in this mortal coil.

 

lol, WTF?

Ok, Obergruppenführer Questerr.

This is LITERALLY the argument that Nazi's used for A LOT of things. I thought the Nazi's were the end all be all of evil? Do you want to act this way?

 

Correct, parents generally do, however we are not talking about that, I would not want my mother to make the decision, because she loves me too much. My wishes have been made clear, I do not want to be resuscitated after illness reaches a certain point. My mother would not make that decision for me, her love would blind her to the realities, just as Charlies parents could well be blinded in this case.

 

That's very nice but they're still part of the state IE it is the state making the decision for him, and according to you that means he's a chattel owned by same. Remember when the parents making the decision made him a chattel to your mind?
What is the difference?