'Church' to offer 'miracle cure' despite FDA warnings against drinking bleach
58 replies, posted
I don't really mean to imply they aren't, I just find individual liberties to be rather important. I'll admit I'm approaching this from a rather angry point of view though. I have a few friends who are autistic and seeing autistic children being forced to drink bleach pisses me off to no end.
But yeah, I don't think that forcing them is going to do anything but further entrench their beliefs, which could do more damage than good.
From what I recall, this was mainly an effect of bleach enemas instead of just drinking bleach.
And yes, bleach enemas are a thing in alternative medicine.
And your point is? It's still their choice if they refuse to believe the evidence saying they're retarded. You cannot force someone to learn, unfortunately. And if they're deadset on doing something stupid then you're unlikely not going to be able to stop them without using force and at that point you'd need someone to keep an eye on them at all times to make sure they don't do the stupid shit.
My point is -
And my point is: At what point are you infringing on their freedom of choice? You can only lead a horse to water. You cannot force it to drink. If you're going to outright force them to not do stupid shit you're just advocating a literal nanny state.
You can quit the slippery slope crap. This situation is specifically blatantly a time in which to intervene. No where did I advocate a widespread infringement on choices of all varieties.
It's not slippery slope crap though? You are literally advocating that what they want to do is irrelevant. I'm saying that it's not irrelevant because you can try to teach them that what they're trying to do is harmful all you want. You cannot force them to understand though. It's one thing to advocate teaching them why it's harmful. It's another thing altogether to advocate forcing them not to do it afterwards. You are advocating for the latter.
Forcing them to understand and forcing them to not do this action are not mutually exclusive.
Have you tried getting someone who rejects reality to accept when they're wrong? I have on many occasions and it basically never works. If they are dead set on believing one thing regardless of evidence that they're wrong then you cannot force them to understand.
Think of most of the Trumpets on Facepunch or conspiracy theorists and antivaxxers. You can argue with those people all you want but all the evidence in the world proving them wrong means exactly nothing because they outright reject reality. 90% of the people who this article is about are the same way. The only thing you can realistically do is stop them from letting their stupidity affect their children. Forcing them not to do these harmful things to themselves though is crossing the line and removing their free will. At that point you can really only let them make their mistake and, if they survive, hope that they learn from it.
Regardless of success, I believe there is still a moral prerogative to prevent someone from killing themselves unintentionally. I'm not one prone to giving up at the first or second failure experienced in something.
I don't give a shit about trump supporters or conspiracy theorists. In this specific case, I think it is pretty damn important to prevent someone from killing themselves even if they don't believe they would actually die.
Okay, let me try this another way. If they are going to value their lives so little that they will do something blatantly stupid even after having been informed of the issues with the action inq uestion: Why the fuck should I value their lives? It'd be one thing if it's a suicidal person since they obviously need help with an actual mental issue. It's a totally different thing if someone is being willfully ignorant about the dangers of the actions they are taking though. There is no moral prerogative to prevent stupid people from doing stupid shit after they've been educated on why doing that stupid shit is probably going to get them put in a hospital or worse. At that point they are not going to learn not to do it and if they survive they're likely to just move on to something else just as stupid, if they don't simply double down on what they just survived. The only thing that course of action results in is bogging down our systems and increasing the chances of a legitimate issue not getting dealt with. These are adults we're talking about, not children. And we are not their parents. So why should we baby them if they're insisting on doing stupid shit despite being informed of the dangers?
I legitimately don't know why you're struggling to understand this because it seems quite simple to me.
I think it would probably be more conducive to put out a public service announcement which details the horrible effects of drinking bleach while forcing the church to stop selling this shit as opposed to going after every individual who tries to drink it.
Why is this something that might be genuinely necessary
PSAs barely work in this country especially when people are mixing religion and politics into everything.
The words 'idiot cull' come to mind. And the people responsible for making these videos and holding these events are probably going away for a long, long time.
You completely do not understand their situation.
They don't value their lives so little.
They are so desperate in preserving their lives that they are looking for a sham miracle drug to save them, even when told it will give them the opposite effect.
Why you struggle to see that is beyond me.
I'm so desperate to cure this headache I'll just shoot myself in the head with a gun because someone told me it'll cure my headache even though everyone else is telling me that's a fucking retarded thing to do and explaining why. Hm... Totally not on me when I still insist on shooting myself in the head.
How do you expect to educate and change someone's mind who is so far gone that they would willingly disregard advice against snake oil miracle cures? On top of that, ignoring advice about bleach not being a miracle cure.
I suppose blind faith is the basis of religion though.
I don't know nor did I ever say I did. I said we have a moral obligation to try.
And an even further obligation to prevent them from killing themselves regardless of their understanding.
Which Alice seems to think is stupid because it might offend someone's right to faith in other matters that probably have nothing to do with killing themselves.
Imagine not vaccinating your fucking kid and forcing them to drink bleach, as well as giving them bleach enemas to remove "parasites" which actually are just bits of intestine falling out
There is no obligation to protect willful ignorance. Nor is there a moral obligation to do so. As a matter of fact, there's probably more of an obligation to prevent the spread of it.
Luckily, I'm not Alice. On the other hand, I think what they are trying to say is that they don't see why intervention is needed unless they are affecting others. If someone disconnected from everyone else want to go drink bleach to go cure their autism/broken bone/cold, let them. Nothing that could be salvaged was lost. Once they start dragging outsiders into it, then you get a different situation.
This is basically what I'm saying, yeah. By all means try and convince them that drinking bleach is a stupid idea. But if they insist on not believing you then as long as the only one they're endangering is themselves nobody is obligated to stop them. Once you get into actual intervention to stop them past informing them of the dangers you legitimately get into nanny state territory which just opens up a can of worms. (Pragmatically speaking the fact that if someone is that insistent on doing something stupid even after being informed of the dangers, you're always going to need someone around to stop them in particular which is completely unreasonable. They're adults, they shouldn't need nannies to protect them from themselves after they've been informed of the potential consequences of their actions.)
So if I persuade a family member of yours to drink bleach because it's a good idea, and they conclude that this is correct, you will do nothing whatsoever to prevent them because "it's their consenting decision"?
Do you also ignore speed limits while refusing to wear a seat belt because 'the nanny state'?
What I don't understand is, if you're gonna scam the fuck out of people, why not just give them a harmless placebo?
Why make them drink something that'll kill them eventually?
You mean like kids that may not be of an age where they can realistically deduce their own decision on this?
A better example: My mother had a heart attack in January. After going to the hospital and getting a full checkup she was diagnosed with heart disease. Because she has heart disease this means both of her siblings are increased risk of having it as well. She's been trying to convince them to eat better and have more concern for their health and they've at best just written off her concerns and at worst actively mocked her for it. So should we be actively interfering in how they're choosing to live? After all it's provably stupid for them to dig their feet in here.
No. I wear my seatbelt because I'm not fucking retarded. The law doesn't even come into play there.
You should read the thread more carefully because nobody has been saying that it's acceptable for these morons to force their kids to drink bleach. The only point of contest has been whether we should baby adults who refuse to believe facts and want to drink bleach themselves.
Scamming is one type of greed, it's less about fun about more about absolutely maximum profit.
This is a form of sociopathic pleasure
manipulating people into killing themselves for you, that's not out of greed, it's a sick a game.
You can't protect stupid people from themselves. The more you try to coddle them the dumber society breeds them.
Way I see it, as long as their dumbassery isn't causing harm to others, then let them be as stupid as they please.
Whether you like it or not the state has an obligation to take care of its citizens, which includes preventing themselves from being poisoned by a scam artist
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.