Translate

Wednesday, 2 March 2011

Claire Khaw on the Victoria Derbyshire Show (starts 26th minute)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00yzjbs#synopsis

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00fdkhv


Victoria Derbyshire
At 10: the mum who posted on a website that she was considering putting her 6 yr old severely disabled child into residential care - because she could no longer cope. Riven Vincent has never done an interview about her situation, until now. Do tune in at 10.

Claire Khaw
She should smothered it after it was born, shouldn't she, rather than expect the taxpayer to pick up the bill? 

Why should the taxpayer pay for her severely disabled child?

Ask her that.

Professional sympathy seeker. Well, she ain't getting none from me.

We all know lots of mothers tote their severely disabled children around to get attention and rise in the pecking order of a group of mums.

The more disabled your child, the higher you are in the pecking order.
Claire Khaw ‎
"Caring for my daughter is relentless. She needs someone 24 hours a day. She must be tube-fed, is doubly incontinent, cannot walk, talk, sit up, or use her arms. She has to be lifted using a hoist from chair to wheelchair, between bed and bath. She doesn't grow up. I sleep in a bed next to Celyn every night, beside a monitor that checks her breathing. I've barely had an unbroken night since she was born and I am exhausted. My sleeplessness leads to problems with everything else. I'm too tired to cook and give my three other children the attention I need to. Caring takes over your whole life."

What is the point of bringing up a child like that?

What about her three other children? What sort of life do they have?

What a DISGUSTING mother who would ruin the lives of her other children just so she can get the attention she craves and needs.
Claire Khaw 
Does this disgusting woman have a husband or is she one of those single mothers who are a burden on the state?

If she does I feel very very very sorry for him.
Claire Khaw 
Don't be silly, Kevin. It is not a BNP thing, it is about how the taxpayer has been roped into paying for every single stupid unproductive just because someone is a mother.

It is, in short, a Mumsnet mentality of *entitlement*, of power without responsibility which seems to be the prerogative of women these days.
Victoria Derbyshire 
Hi all, I've just rung Claire. She's agreed to come on, although I pointed out of course she really doesn't have to. I asked her if she has children & whereabouts in the country she is, and I asked her (as we ask ALL our contributors), if she would be courteous. She was very well-spoken and polite and said "of course I will, I wouldn't dream of being anything but. I'm in a different person in real life" ..or words to that effect. 
Claire Khaw 
The welfare state is the root of all evil, people. Unfortunately, it is the Sacred Cow that the British worship. What I am doing is the equivalent of BLASPHEMY. That is why I am so hated.

But then the welfare state is one of the reasons why the Western nations are mostly financially and morally bankrupt.

Indeed, it is the systematic cultivation of FAILURE.
Claire Khaw 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Fraser_Tytler

A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence:

From bondage to spiritual faith;
From spiritual faith to great courage;
From courage to liberty;
From liberty to abundance;
From abundance to selfishness;
From selfishness to complacency;
From complacency to apathy;
From apathy to dependence;
From dependence back into bondage.

What stage of the cycle are we on, folks, eh, eh, eh?
Mariabella Hollens 
Claire was blocked by The Today programme Facebook page at the end of last year and all her comments removed. She was up with the lark every morning to comment on that page and was shocked to be removed, as were the other regulars who didn't think that the BBC would censor their page. She has also been blocked by Mumsnet and others I believe. 

Rob Corbett 
I'm sure Hitler had the same ideas at the outset, not everyone saw it the same way though eh?
Claire Khaw 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit

See SUICIDE, MURDER AND DEATH

This practice preceded Hitler, Rob.
Claire Khaw 
If it is NECESSARY for the survival of one's society, then it is MORAL.

Claire Khaw 

I need to articulate the views and concerns of the over-burdened taxpayer.
Rob Corbett 
Not when you are ramming euthanasia down our throats. These aren't the views of the masses.

Claire Khaw 
Not just me talking about euthanasia, Rob.

Are you saying I am responsible for the Right to Die movement?

You are ascribing to me greater powers than I really have.

Mariabella Hollens 
She can't bring herself to say that she would strangle her own baby at birth, which is what she has said many many times.  [Actually, I said "smother" though I hope the midwife would do this for me to save me the trouble.]

Peter Hinson 
It's scary to know that Claire is loose on the streets. Hopefully she will be recaptured soon!

Claire Khaw 
Riven was calm at first and then made all the right sounds of indignation and outrage. Jack Lepresti was pretty good too, huffing and puffing his disbelief. 

I believe in free and excellent education for all. 

Everyone in this country has been bribed by benefits and is now completely addicted to the welfare state. It is like trying to take the bottle away from a drunk.

Claire Khaw 
The kitty is not bottomless and spending must be prioritised!

Claire Khaw 
‎"Brave effort, Claire. I thought you made a lot of the points the MP should have made if he weren't so craven," said one of my FB friends.
Claire Khaw 
Free speech: use it or lose it!

Mariabella Hollens 
Claire, the ultimate responsibility of a civilised society is to look after those who need help. Disabled children and support for their families are top of those list of priorities. You admit there is a list of priorities, don't you Claire?

Claire Khaw 
‎"Claire's view is a very very minority view", said Victoria. "Hopefully!" was the response. In saying the unsayable, I have done more for the taxpayer than that useless Taxpayers' Alliance.
2 hours ago


Claire Khaw 
Mariabella, HOW to prioritise spending is a very political issue. This means it is CONTROVERSIAL. What is so terribly terribly sad for the taxpayer is the way POLITICIANS who are supposed to be looking after our money dare not talk in these terms.

They are only bribing us with our own money.

They are bribing the unproductive with the money of the productive.

How is that a good thing?

Claire Khaw 
Also, Mariabella, the ultimate responsibility of government is to rule RATIONALLY, reward rational behaviour and discourage irrational behaviour.
Victoria Derbyshire 
PLse take Claire Khaw with a pinch of salt...her raison d'etre is to wind you up..


Any daughter of mine would be told not to ruin her life bringing up a severely disabled child. A schoolfriend of mine did that with her disabled daughter. Husband left her. She could have had more children, but she thought she wouldn't be able to cope. Tragic, really.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pater_familias

"He had a duty to father and raise healthy children as future citizens of Rome, to maintain the moral propriety and well-being of his household, to honour his clan and ancestral gods and to dutifully participate - and if possible, serve - in Rome's political, religious and social life. In effect, the pater familias was expected to be a good citizen. In theory at least, he held powers of life and death over every member of his extended familia through ancient right but in practice, the extreme form of this right was seldom exercised."

The question I asked Riven Vincent:


"What  are the benefits for the taxpayer in continuing to support the burdensome and unproductive existence of Celyn who will never lead a normal productive life and who is also ruining the childhoods of her healthy and normal brothers or sisters?"

Facebook friend's comment:

"No one in the political establishment dares to say no to any demand from mothers and families. It is terrible moral blackmail and every time someone surrenders they return to exact more and more. As it has been said in another context: paying the Vikings the Danegeld did not encourage them to leave. Instead, they came back asking for more and more."

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.com/2011/07/transcript-of-what-i-said-on-victoria.html

58 comments:

Anonymous said...

Incoherent drivel, as usual. Seriously flouting this all over twitter when it's such nonsensical garbage is foolish.

Anonymous said...

Professor Stephen Hawkings?

Anonymous said...

Seeking so much publicity will come back to bite you. I'm very excited about the backlash...the cancelled talks, the exile from debate, the shunning from all except the morally bankrupt.

Anonymous said...

not even human is she as the every person, disabled or not has the right to live a life with the best possible help to attain that quality, she does not even come close to having this right as she is totally heartless and I pity her kids

Anonymous said...

Someone please kick her in the head and tell her to think about what a terrible person she is.

Anonymous said...

Just because you speak with an upper class accent and use clever words does not mean you are sane. The woman is barking.

Anonymous said...

Simple question for you Claire, if you've got the guts to answer it...

If your child contracted a serious illness which left him severely physically disabled would you have wanted him put down rather than be a burden on the tax payer?

Looking forward to your answer. A simple "yes" or "no" will suffice!

Anonymous said...

Knew you wouldn't have the guts to answer my question.

Claire Khaw said...

I have nothing against physical disability. I remember feeling quite upset and angry watching a documentary about Siamese twins being separated, after which one of them died, just because their parents wanted them to be "normal".

I was also upset about the operation performed on "spider girl" - the girl with 8 limbs in India, which was performed for the same reasons.

Anonymous said...

Oh, poor you being upset by the disabled.

Now answer the question I put to you please. Would you put your child down if he became disabled in order to save the tax payer from the burden of paying for his care? Yes or No?

Claire Khaw said...

If in coma for years then pull the plug.

If brain-damaged then pull the plug and do not resuscitate.

If merely physically disabled then NO.

Anonymous said...

Why should the taxpayer pay for your severely disabled child?

This is your question,the one you posed. Now answer it.

I suppose your reply is that you are wealthy enough to cover the millions of pounds needed to look after such a child over the course of its life time and it is only the poor who should smother their draining, disabled kids right?

Claire Khaw said...

I am not as wealthy as you seem to think I am!

There are such things as charities for the disabled, you know.

Anonymous said...

What a ridiculous response! You'd have to set up your very own charity for your child in order to meet all his needs in such a situation.

So that's how you'd deal with it would you, rather than be a burden on the taxpayer - how very novel. Let's just hope the public would be more generous towards your hypothetical charity than you have been towards the woman whose daughter you suggested she have smothered at birth.

Claire Khaw said...

Don't be ridiculous. I was not proposing to set up my own charity. I was saying that disabled people have the option of relying on charity.

Anonymous said...

It would be very easy for me to write a response filled with insults and references to Hitler, yet it would probably be inconsequential to a woman such as yourself and, despite making me feel better - would have little impact on you.

Granted, we live in a democracy and people are entitled to their opinions; but, unlike you, who by your own admission simply, 'points out the wrongs of the world and stands up for the tax payer,' as well as speaking hypothetically about rejecting your own flesh and blood- I am speaking from experience.

You see, my little girl has a rare genetic condition called 'Williams Syndrome' - ever heard of it?! I would guess not. It is an 'out of the blue' occurrence that happens in about 1 in 25,000 live births. There are no routine tests available to detect it before the child is born, in fact many children go undiagnosed for many months or even years. My little girl wasn't diagnosed until she was 14 months old.

On reading the literature on WS, you may come across sentences such as, 'WS children have mild to moderate learning difficulties' alongside sentences such as, 'many display a real gift for music, are warm, sociable, friendly and chatty individuals who see the good in everyone.'

The bitter irony there of course is that (unlike me) if you were lucky enough to ever meet my little girl, she would welcome you with big open arms, melt your cold heart with her beautiful smile and dazzling blue eyes and laugh with you; despite the fact you believe she should have been drowned at birth.

Who are you or any of us to say how our children will turn out and what contribution they will make to society? You said you had children of your own and although I don't know what they do to justify their existence; there is no way that when they were born you could ever have predicted what they would turn out to be. Do you think Jack the Ripper's mother knew he was going to become a murderer? There isn't a test to determine which babies will become murderers, rapists or pedophiles are there?

I’m assuming that your child-bearing days are over and I don't know if you have grandchildren or not, but if your children ever do have children of their own and they are born with a disability - how will you feel then, it’s hard to say with any degree of certainty, unless the situation ever arose for you.

Similarly, how will you feel if someone you love is in a terrible accident tomorrow and is left brain damaged and requiring your constant care? What happens if someone you love develops dementia and you become their carer? Will you not require the help, compassion and support of your fellow taxpayer then? Or would you simply 'reject' them, thus in spite of your strong views to the contrary 'burden' the taxpayer with them entirely? You think it would be that 'simple' to do?

None of us can predict the future and all of us hope and pray that our loved ones will lead happy, healthy, fulfilling and productive lives and if this means my taxes being used to help families achieve this for themselves and our future generations; I couldn't be happier.

My little girl has WS, but it doesn't define her; neither I, nor anyone else can truly say how this will affect her in the future because she; like every other human being on Earth, is an individual with a unique personality and a unique set of strengths and weaknesses.

However, I know one thing, she is the light of my family's life and always will be; she is ten times the human being you are at only 15 months old - you could learn a lot from her. So, who should we really be asking to justify their existence - you or her?

Anonymous said...

No, you're being ridiculous if you think that there are charities out there that have the resources to look after severely disabled people for the entire duration of their lives, without any recourse whatsoever to the NHS or taxpayer. You live in cloud cuckoo land.

Claire Khaw said...

I am afraid nothing in the previous two posts has changed my mind about what I would do if I found myself the mother of a severely disabled baby.

No one should be paying for the children of anyone else, able-bodied or disabled.

There is no need for any of you to agree with me. I will have aired my view, and you yours. Life goes on in much the same way as it did.

Keep calm and carry on.

Anonymous said...

I am perfectly calm thank you; my life will continue as happy and fulfilled as it always was - all I will say is that you can not; with 100% certainity say how you would feel until you are put in that situation yourself.

Anonymous said...

So your BNP or are you shaggiong the people who are cutting the services,you sad old bitch

Anonymous said...

You did not addess my point about charities. They do not exist to look after specific individuals for the durationn of their lives. You have admitted that you would not euthanase your child if he became physically disabled, that you are not particualrly rich, so how exactly are you going to ensure that your child would be cared for in such a situation?

You say that no one should have to pay for other people's children, by the same token I guess you beleive that it is wrong for your taxes to be used to educate the nation's children free of charge too?

Lovely post from the woman with the child with WS - I applaud you madam! Shame your words fell on deaf ears.

Claire Khaw said...

My view on what I would do if I gave birth to a severely disabled baby is instinctive and nothing to do with my political party.

The BNP as far as I know have no policy on the disabled.

Who are you suggesting that I am "shaggiong"?

Claire Khaw said...

If the charity coffers are empty, then and one had better resign oneself to one's fate.

Death comes to every one of us, and some of us will have to face it sooner than others.

I see no particular purpose in staying alive at all costs, especially when one's quality of life is so poor that one is just a burden to oneself and others.

I believe in free and excellent education to promote social mobility and a meritocracy.

Anonymous said...

So, in effect if you found yourself the mother of a suddenly severely disabled child and there was no charity in existence that could help you long-term with the huge costs associated with looking after him you'd just rather let him die than seek help from the NHS?

Liar!

Claire Khaw said...

If there were an NHS I would go to it.

If there were a charity I would go to it.

If they said NO I would have to accept that and deal with it, wouldn't I?

I don't fancy looking after a severely disabled child or adult, to be honest. If they are no good to man or beast, then I don't see why they should not be let go.

If I myself became severely disabled, I too would have to accept the situation, as I was being "let go".

Why is this rocket science to so many people?

Anonymous said...

"If there were an NHS I would go to it".

But this is clearly against your principles - or don't you actually have any?

Your views are at best muddled or at worst hugely hypocritical, and it don't take a rocket scientist to work that out!

Anonymous said...

Claire ,
I do hope your never faced with a disability yourself,mind you Who would want to look after you if you was to end up disabled ,or yes NHS tax payers money would pay for it ,best place for people like you is to drop you in abig hole and cover you up!! It is people like you in society that let things down for others .BNP trash thats what you are sado!!!!

cjames1066 said...

I work as Welfare Benefits Advisor and I know first hand how difficult it is to obtain benefits for disabled people. The myth that people live in luxary and are addicted to the welfare state is ideological political rhetoric perpetuated by multi- millionaire Politicians, supported by the rightwing media and distorts the reality of people who live daily with ill-health and disabities.

Carers at home save the TAx Payer, (the group of people Clare is most concerned about) BILLIONS of pounds. If these people couldnt be cared for by family members the cost to society would be untenable.

Carers Allowance is 53.40 per week and is only available if the person being cared for is severly disabled (entitled to high care rates of DLA). hardly amounts that elad to addiction to living on benefits.

The mark of a civilised society is how the powerful, priviliged and well look after the poor, disabled, vulnerable and marginalised.

We have come along way with medical advances and some of the consequences are many babies born at early stages of pregnancy do live, but often with disablities. But we cant advance technology and benefit from such gains and then turn our faces away from these children and their parents who need the extra support and care because, they have lived.

When Beveridge set up the Welfare State, he saw it as `collective conscience`.....that as a society the fit and well look after the weak.

because one day, the fit and the well also may become the ill and the weak.

carolyne

Claire Khaw said...

I said:

"If there were an NHS I would go to it."

Why is this inconsistent?

I am saying that no one is going to reject a free handout when they feel they are in need of it.

If there were no free handout, I would just have to accept things, like everyone else.

I don't see any point in prolonging a miserable existence at the expense of the taxpayer for no discernible benefit to wider society.

I would ask the doctor for a prognosis for the future. If I was told things looked hopeless I would tell them to pull the plug.

Claire Khaw said...

If I became ill, poor and neglected, I would accept that I would have to suffer and then die.

Anonymous said...

"I don't see any point in prolonging a miserable existence at the expense of the taxpayer for no discernible benefit to wider society".

And who would you set up to be the judge of that?

When would you have pulled the plug on Stephen Hawking? Or Christy Brown? Or any other the other countless individuals born with or who have developed serious degenerative and debilitating conditions, but who have nevertheless made a valuable contribution to society?


"If I became ill, poor and neglected, I would accept that I would have to suffer and then die".


And you would prefer that to the current system would you? If you developed cancer tomorrow and were too poor to pay for private treatment you would prefer it if you could die a slow, painful death than receive free treatment under the NHS, right?

Claire Khaw said...

I would claim what I was entitled to under the NHS if there was an NHS or accept my fate if there was not an NHS.

Anonymous said...

You didn't actually answer either of my questions, presumably because you were unablee to, or maybe you didn't understand them? I can re-phrase if necessary!

Here's another question for you - why do you moderate all your blog comments before allowing them to appear on your page? I would have thought that someone like you would be all for free speech, no matter what was being said, or how offensive it was!

Anonymous said...

Your Chinese upbringing betrays your Britishness. Clearly the dying rooms, the bucket at the side of a birth, the casual way people with disabilities are abandoned in China. seems to have shaped your cold heart. Why not live in China, they already stand by all of your ideals?
You are a narcissist and cannot fathom your own journey through your own principals.

Claire Khaw said...

I do not come from China, though I am aware of female infanticide - a common practice amongst poorer cultures.

You are probably unaware that WW2 there was an increased number of dead babies in the canals of Britain found by the Inland Waterway Services.

It has been suggested that people were having more extra-marital sex and were reluctant to expend scarce resources on hopeless cases.

In other words, these mothers did not have the luxury of having someone else pick up the tab or the ability to shake their begging bowl aggressively at the taxpayer.

You display a very hard liberal arrogance and a very sad historical ignorance.

I note that you are one of those people who confuse "principals" with "principles".

I do not wish to move to China or live anywhere else because I now feel it is my duty to nurse this country through its liberal dementia. With care and patience, it is possible the patient will recover. I shall do my best anyway.

Anonymous said...

We're talking about right now, today not WW2 time.

Narcissist.

Anonymous said...

For the record I said you had a Chinese upbringing, not that you were raised in China. Trying to work out what damaged you, your father's disappointment that you were a girl or your mother's. Depends which was Chinese I suppose, unless they were both ashamed of producing you. Are both now dead? Or do you keep in touch, they must be so proud.

Claire Khaw said...

Not wasting limited resources on hopeless cases and how to use limited resources in the most rational way are questions that remain eternally relevant.

Claire Khaw said...

Both my parents are well and rather bemused by the fact that there can be such rending of garments, gnashing of teeth and tearing of hair over a few basic home truths about the facts of life.

Anonymous said...

I would like to respond to a couple of your points. I find it astounding that a woman such as you is given the national platform of BBC Radio to air her views and then doesn’t seem to be able to back up her argument with any substance.

You failed to respond to any of the questions I posed in my previous post (my little girl has WS) and your comment, ‘no one should be paying for the children of anyone else able bodied or disabled’ is hardly compelling.

Similarly, your statement, ‘my view is instinctive…’ is also rather weak. You said on the radio you have children of your own and therefore I would hope that even you can understand and appreciate the love you feel for a child.

Therefore, you are honestly saying that you could suppress your natural maternal instincts and reject a child you bore? How would you know that this child wasn’t going to make a positive contribution to society in his or her own way?

Everyone is born with a need to be nurtured and developed in order to reach their full potential whatever this may be. Some may need this for longer or maybe even throughout their whole life in some way or another, but it doesn’t render them worthless to ‘man or beast’ as you so eloquently put it.

Equally, your deeply profound statement, ‘I don’t fancy looking after a severely disabled child or adult’ is almost laughable. It’s almost like saying, ‘I can’t be arsed rising to the challenge of both nurturing and supporting a child, who may have a disability or some sort of hurdle to overcome. Neither can I be bothered to care for an elderly or vulnerable adult member of my family, who deserves my support!’

Tell me, how exactly would you be any use to man or beast then? When the ‘man’ here of course metaphorically represents a member of your family? Do you understand the true meaning of ‘family values?’ No man is an island and we all need the support of other people from both extended family and society at certain points in our life.

Reducing your argument to the insult, ‘why is this rocket science to so many people?’ is quite a stark juxtaposition with your earlier comment, ‘keep calm and carry on.’ I sense you are perhaps feeling the pressure under scrutiny?

Claire Khaw said...

Most people get what I say, they really do. They get not wanting to bring up a disabled child, they get not wanting to look after a hopeless case or to be a hopeless case that needs looking after. You may disapprove, and that is your right. But these are my views and if you disapprove, then that is just too bad.

Anonymous said...

Most people??!

Yes, I'm sure if you were given a national platform to air these views you'd have the ringing endorsement of 95% of the populatioion and be garlanded wherever you went, you fantasist.

Anonymous said...

You are completely outclassed by the last response.

Many people do choose and understand the choice about not having a disabled child, many choose to terminate. But expecting a parent to kill their baby is frankly weird.

Anonymous said...

Judging by the comments on here I would say most people don't get you at all - not in this country anyway. If you believe they do; you are more immersed in your fantasy world than I first though!

Claire Khaw said...

I know most people don't get me, and this means I must concentrate harder on the message and its propagation. Thank you for pointing out that I have to do more and better.

Claire Khaw said...

"Many people do choose and understand the choice about not having a disabled child, many choose to terminate. But expecting a parent to kill their baby is frankly weird."

It is too late for Riven Vincent to dispose of her severely disabled daughter now, I know.

I cannot "expect" her to turn back time. The most I can do is to inform the parents of severely disabled babies that smothering them at birth is a rational and honourable option.

Anonymous said...

Yes, you certainly do need to do better; if you want to be taken seriously.

You can start by actually justifying your argument by responding to the questions people put to you with eloquence and intelligence, not with simple retorts like 'too bad' and ' I must try better' which quite frankly aren't going to help you achieve your goal of world domination any time soon!

Claire Khaw said...

Sometimes, it just cannot be helped if people don't like your answers, and one must accept the situation.

Anonymous said...

You haven't given any answers! Your posts are full of contradictions, 'most people get me....I know most people don't get me must try harder!'

Similarly, your comment about education promoting 'meritocracy' lacks credibility given the term itself is laced with ambiguity!

I appreciate people have opinions and ideals that don't match my own; that's what makes life interesting. However, in order for me to respect these views - one must put forward a convincing argument, which at the moment one is failing miserably to do!

Claire Khaw said...

I quite see that my views are not to your liking and that you reject them, which is your right.

There is no need for me to convince everyone, in any case!

Anonymous said...

It's a good job you don't have to convince everyone isn't it? Or should I say anyone?!

Claire Khaw said...

A lot of people agree with me but are too scared to do so openly. They will doubtless appreciate the leadership I have shown in this matter.

Anonymous said...

Ah - so you have given yourself the role of advocate for the silent minority? That's how you justify your existence?! The silence is indeed deafening.

Claire Khaw said...

The silent minority are by definition silent.

Anonymous said...

The subtly is obviously lost on you!

Anonymous said...

Even the Neanderthals looked after their disabled. I'm not sure quite where in the evolution of human consciousness this person got stuck, but she sure is in an awful place. I pity her.

Claire Khaw said...

Victoria Derbyshire:

"Celyn has quadriplegic cerebral palsy and epilepsy and cannot walk, talk or sit up, and she is also blind."

I think the Neanderthals would have had problems looking after her.

Philip Arbon said...

"Even the Neanderthals looked after their disabled. I'm not sure quite where in the evolution of human consciousness this person got stuck, but she sure is in an awful place. I pity her."

Do you have proof for this insane assumption that neanderthals looked after their disabled?

By the way everybody, Claire is looking at the bigger picture.

Its pretty obvious, if a human being cannot walk, talk, eat, or shit on their own, what kind of a human being are they?

Ultimately it is SELFISH to keep them alive, you are putting your own sappy feelings ahead of reason.

Such people funnily enough are seen as heroes, for not being tough enough to spare a child a life of misery? How pathetic.

I guarantee everybody you talk to in person, would agree, such a child should not be allowed to exist. This is not only rational, it is truly loving.

Whats loving about keeping a suffering useless person alive? Whats loving about forcing everyone to pay for it? Whats loving about raising someone that can't become anything or do anything or ever be independent?

"not even human is she as the every person, disabled or not has the right to live a life with the best possible help to attain that quality, she does not even come close to having this right as she is totally heartless and I pity her kids"

You are totally heartless, because apparently no matter how hard I work, no matter how hard I try, someone with no ability to succeed deserves as much success and quality of life as myself?


What is the point in hard work if you force equality?

Claire can see beyond her selfish needs and emotions, to view the bigger picture, can you?

And no, the mark of a civilised society is NOT the way it treats its disabled.

The mark of a civilised society is how it treats THE MAJORITY, the families, the people that make that society what it is.

We're living in a society in which the minority, the weak, the disabled are uplifted, at the expense of the hard working folk, this is obviously wrong.

Life isn't a disney movie, you have to accept some brutal truths in order to really thrive.

Without any strength, resolve, or discipline, you essentially have a society of laggards, of morons, of 'pussies'.

NO and once again NO, a child that cannot do anything for itself does not deserve to live, I'll say it again, it is SELFISH to keep that child alive, very very selfish. Get as offended as you like, those with the courage to accept the truth will agree.