Open Chat... All Day, Every Day! Express Your Views, Debate, and Challenge the Views of Others!

In order to keep up with the nature of free, spirited debate, I wanted to place the chat feature at the top of the homepage. This ensures people can come here and share their views on anything they wish and not have it be related to any specific discussion. Here, people can share ideas, links, and views "unmoderated" and an their own pace. To me, this makes The Elephant in the Room blog truly a place for debate.

Monday, December 3, 2012

December 3, 2012 - Morning Headlines

- Korean presidential candidates claim that North Korea is planning its upcoming rocket launch near South Korea's election day in an attempt to sway the election (Fox News):

- The US is now saying there is a "red line" for Syria and the potential utilization of its chemical weapons on its own people (ABC News):

- A US Coast Guardsman died after the cutter he was serving on, The Halibut, was rammed by a fishing boat that was under investigation for smuggling (NBC News):

*** Join our Fiscal Cliff open debate. Express your views and your solutions, and see what others have to say: ***


  1. This---->The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) a U.N. Treaty that comes up for a vote in Congress THIS WEEK.

    This is very bad, and opens the door for a bunch of unpleasant 'unintended' consequences – (although I don't think they're altogether unintended)

    See: Ocare's 'Complete Life Plan'


    Of course - the LSM would think this is a GOOD idea (and better yet - a great reason to bash a conservative)

    2. Children with disabilities shall be registered immediately [[with the U.N.]] after birth and shall have the right from birth to a name, the right to acquire a nationality and, as far as possible, the right to know and be cared for by their parents.

    "...the UNCRPD enjoins states to ensure that all actions concerning disabled children are made on the basis of the child’s best interest. In order for states to live up to their treaty obligations, they must necessarily make judgments about children’s best interests continuously. Should the government’s assessment of the child’s best interests differ from that of the parents, the government gets to make the decision, not the parents."


    1. 2. The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

      21. While traditional human rights treaties lay down the right to life and are silent on the specific question of euthanasia, the recent UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities adopted on 24 January 2007 and entered into force 3 May 2008, contains a specific provision expressly dealing with a euthanasia-related practice. Its Art. 25 (f) provides that States Parties shall ‘prevent discriminatory denial of health care or health services or food and fluids on the basis of disability’. This provision may be combined with Art. 10, which deals in general and traditional terms with the right to life of disabled persons. The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities is aimed at prohibiting discrimination against disabled persons, apparently including forms of eugenic and economic euthanasia, but is silent on the point of whether or to what extent the patient’s consent to euthanasia may be relevant.

      And THIS is how - in the 'children's best interest' - 'other countries' deal with THEIR 'sick/disabled' babies:

      "This is the logical end result when nationalized health care is mixed with the belief that quality of life is more important than life itself. An otherwise civilized people begins to exterminate its children to prevent them from becoming burdens."

      ‘I have no doubt that if natural checks were allowed to operate right through the human as they do in the animal world, a better result would follow. Among the brutes, the weaker are driven to the wall, the diseased fall out in the race of life. The old brutes, when feeble or sickly, are killed. If men insisted that those who were sickly should be allowed to die without help of medicine or science, if those who are weak were put upon one side and crushed, if those who were old and useless were killed, if those who were not capable of providing food for themselves were allowed to starve, if all this were done, the struggle for existence among men would be as real as it is among brutes and would doubtless result in the production of a higher race of men.’40

      "And disabled babies are at risk as well. ‘Ethicist’ Peter Singer has advocated legalization of infanticide to a certain age. He writes: ‘[K]illing a disabled infant is not morally equivalent to killing a person. Very often it is not wrong at all.’ 24"

      Another example of how countries 'take care' of disabled children:

  2. More of this disgusting cloud of liberalism that wants to take over, unite, and more importantly bind the world together. It all sounds nice, this one: disabled children, but it's terrible. Good by freedom. Hello new world order