Hm, did I make an extra paragraph or something? I thought I was refering to the people that couldn't afford such a thing. Or should I restate my stance in every setnance to make it clearer? I'm not talking ease of such an analysis, I'm not talking changing laws, I'm talking about the ONE possible person that could POSSIBLY not afford such a thing but would benefit from it. In such an, apparently extremely unlikely event, I'd have no problem with that person using it.
Or perhaps I should be more specific, also stating their sex, age, date of birth and genetic sequence before my point isn't turned around like so many rotten vegetables? Really now...
Your sole counter argument seems to be "it's hard to decide what someone can or cannot afford, so let's bunch them all up in a single bag". It seems to me that judging on someone's murder motives is infinitely more complex than determining their monetary status but hey, I'm not a lawyer. Perhaps we should ask insurance companies to do it, they seem to have a good grasp of people evaluation...
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2002-07-08 12:42 pm (UTC)I'm not talking ease of such an analysis, I'm not talking changing laws, I'm talking about the ONE possible person that could POSSIBLY not afford such a thing but would benefit from it. In such an, apparently extremely unlikely event, I'd have no problem with that person using it.
Or perhaps I should be more specific, also stating their sex, age, date of birth and genetic sequence before my point isn't turned around like so many rotten vegetables? Really now...
Your sole counter argument seems to be "it's hard to decide what someone can or cannot afford, so let's bunch them all up in a single bag". It seems to me that judging on someone's murder motives is infinitely more complex than determining their monetary status but hey, I'm not a lawyer. Perhaps we should ask insurance companies to do it, they seem to have a good grasp of people evaluation...