British baby Charlie Gard which had an extremely rare genetic condition has died

fuck of normalfags

Yanks need to understand that this isn't what it was about.

In a way I do agree with you. We must implement some sort of eugenics program and get rid of weak and stupid people.
That being said, this sets somewhat of a dangerous precedent. I mean, the state pretty much took possession of the child and told the parents to fuck off.
Truth be told, I wouldn't give a rat's ass if the kid wasn't white, but as things stand, I see this as a loss.

So what are you going to do about your genitals mutilated by jewish doctors amerikike.

it's a post-birth miscarriage that would never have lived, harden the fuck up. Don't let your empathy be used against you.

...

Dipshit.

You misunderstand, I know the kid didn't have a lot of chances in this life. I take issue with the government (which, mind you, is full of non-white sub-humans) going over the parents' will and deciding what will happen to the child.
What's to stop the government from sentencing a child with a cold to death next? That's what I'm getting to.

I'm not a burger.

Again, I’m not a burger and I do think that male genital mutilation is outrageous. I would camp every single advocate of it.

This.

The slippery slope applies to everything. This has set a strong precedent that being a parent is meaningless from a legal standpoint. The state knows best if you are white.

it wouldn't have lived or would end up a vegetable supported by taxpayers until it died
And it would help open the door to being forced to help more shitskin defects which are vastly higher

almost nothing until parents out there are willing to resort to violence, if you want moral high ground at least don't pick the cause that Nature hates as well.

ZOGs, no shit

This wasn't a case of the government deciding it owned the kid.
It was the doctors at the hospital going "this genetic disorder is lethal 100% of the time. The child is dead. To avoid wasting our time and resources, focus on end of life care and move on."

But a yank pharma company smelling potential profit went to the parents and offered to give them access to this experimental treatment in exchange for ludicrous sums of money.
The staff at the hospital rolled their eyes having seen this snake oil yankee bullshit a hundred times before and said "lolno your kid is dead, learn to live with it"

The yank pharma firm then helped the family kick up a media fuss and got them in touch with media rep groups who got them lots of media attention and organised the crowdfunding for the initial drug cost.

This shit happens on a regular basis.

hundreds of other children died too, this one is not special

The argument is this:
Do the parents have jurisdiction over their child?
Or does the state have jurisdiction over their child?

… Had the parents been abusive or broken the law we can say that they forfeit their rights, but they did not. This was an example of the state saying they own the child, and not the parents. This is the same kind of precedent that would allow Britain to do what the Germans do - arrest parents and take away children if they are home-schooled - or else do what the Norwegians do, and arrest parents for being Christian and take their children away.

It is a very dangerous thing that has happened. The individual incident is a tragedy, but the legislation that justifies what took place is what is truly tyrannical.

F

Off topic but can some brits here care to tell me how GCHQ are so effective in their shilling and derailing tactic around the internet they are so quick.

Children are regularly taken from one or both parents on the flimsiest accusations and excuses in white countries. Use the cases that happen constantly if you want to wake people up to what is going on. But almost all will say "yeah, well, they wouldn't do it without a good reason" which is not terribly far from you thinking this is some new precedent.

So enlighten us.

Unlike other intelligence agencies who act like they above the law, GCHQ IS above the law. Contrary to the manufactured image of ineffectiveness and confusion that the Government chooses to present to the pubic, most agencies are very good at what they do. It just so happens that what they want to do isn’t inline with what the public believes they should be doing.

GCHQ are not in any way shape or form allies of their own native citizens but they are very good at what they do, probably the best data brokers in the world to boot.

If a child is born with a genetic defect that does not allow it to live with but a simple medical procedure, you need to let it die.
It might be harsh, but forcing an organism to "live" using machines is a perversion of nature.
These parents were given promises by a doctor who didn't even see the child. I bet he was after that sweet, sweet money.

F

Again, the issue isn't whether he would have lived, it's that the government had prevented the parents from doing anything about it. In addition, it's also because they would have moved heaven and earth to get the child treatment if he was some shade of brown.

the kid wasn't going to make it, start moving heaven and earth over an already lost cause and then you'll have the brown ones demanding absolutely every treatment under the sun.

I don't want to live under your government or have government healthcare either.

They were not in the UK, and this is why its quite a big deal. Technically the UK still has legislation that allows us to make a public spectacle where we are allowed to insult, dislike, criticise, abuse and ridicule any religion or belief, including homosexuality, homosexuals and anything to do with homosexual marriage.

Apparently this is no longer actually the case despite it being written into our law. Which means either law no longer matters, or there is new crap that has been added (no doubt by the EU). It is thus important that we be told exactly what kind of evil shit they've passed so that we can repeal it, or else at least let the masses know so they realise just how bad things have got.

They won’t bother clarifying anything at this point. Once Britain has left the EU the conservatives will present their proposal of a ‘Constitution of the United Kingdom’. This Constitution will strip all rights away from citizens and put an end to the pesky requirement of having to amend endless laws with language ambiguous enough to be interpreted however they please.

Just watch, The Constitution of the United Kingdom will be proposed, it will happen and it will make Sharia law look just.

This wasn't the government or the courts acting on their own. This was the doctors responsible for his care.
The ones who understood his condition.

He was dead.
Best case scenario he hobbles along into his teens as a cripple and retard.

The treatment being offered by a predatory US pharma firm was untested. Wildly untested.
On top of that moving him in his condition was extremely difficult and painful. The kid was having seizures on a regular basis.
So it was open to debate if he would even survive a trip to the USA. Hence why later on seeing their potential payday dying before they got any money, the yank firm decided it would be happy to let the treatment be done at the hospital.

The parents got manipulated by professional snake oil salesmen.

Whatever your view on this, the main issue is that the government have final say in regards to your children. This is a very worrying concept as it starts with terminally ill babies and then becomes children with treatable diseases, then children taken away for LGBT nonsense.

The slippery slope is real and you cannot give them an inch.

Sauce?

This sounds primitive.

We need to go further.

ARTIFICIAL ALPHA-PROTEOENDOSYMBIOSIS IS THE FUTURE

and that same government wants to give hormones to the disturbed kids, what a time to be alive

Probably. The question isn't if the parents were right or if the doctors were right. The question is who gets to make the decision.

This. It didn't bother me that the government wouldn't pay for an experimental treatment like that, but I found it deeply disturbing that the government wouldn't allow the family to travel in order to get that treatment for free.

washingtontimes.com/news/2016/may/11/norwegian-government-seizes-children-citing-parent/

The parents didn't get arrested so apologies for that mistake, but my point was about the government having power over children.

This guy gets it. As can be seen from the attrocities in Germany and Norway - the State can and will use their powers to 'punish' anyone who goes against them.

To make it more real to you faggots; imagine you have a few children, and then the police come around and take your children away because they found out that you browsed Holla Forums. They could say you were 'indoctrinating' your children, turning them into terrorist nazis.

Its not about this poor kid, its about the principle of who owns children; the parents or the state.

I'm glad this happened. Do these people think they are better than everyone else?

People shouldn't be able to choose what type of healthcare they receive. It's the government's place to decide. Why should some bourgeois asshole who can afford better quality healthcare be able to receive life saving treatment, while the poor who can't afford it have to die while on a government waiting list. The only way to be fair would be everyone in the same system.

>save more years off some more genetic dead ends so we can profit off it with our necomantic (((healthcare))) industry
He's better off this way. His genetic """condition""" would make sure that he got relieved after a few days of his life.
And the beds, staff and equipment that he would be tied to will save more lives that have some actual future.

We need strong offspring to rebuild Western civilization.

It is fairly primitive in concept. It's just the compounds in question aren't easy to synthesise.

It's not even a case of probably.
This happens all the time here in the UK. There's a whole sector of the US healthcare industry dedicated to trying to use cases like this to extract money from the NHS and British public.

The treatment wasn't free.
The company was demanding millions for initial treatment costs which the family raised via crowd funding facilitated by the media representatives the company provided them.
But transport costs would still fall to the NHS. And it was highly debatable if it was possible to transport him without killing him.

The government had nothing to do with the decision.
It was the doctors and the courts.
The doctors when presented with a terminal case have a legal obligation to try and minimise suffering and "preserve their dignity" as the inevitable happens balanced against keeping them alive as long as possible.
Their argument was that not only was this treatment unlikely to work but would also cause considerable suffering and with the best possible outcome prolong his suffering unnecessarily.

Our courts have to deal with a lot of cases like this.
Where snake oil firms from the USA have gotten the hopes up of distraught parents or whackjobs are insisting prayer or homeopathy or witchcraft are the guaranteed cures they need.
For an experimental treatment to be considered it has to have at least gone through animal testing (which this has not) and if the producer is demanding money for access then that just generally makes the judge involved go "lolno fuk off jew"

There was no happy end here. No amount of money would ever change this.
You could have literally every scrap of currency in the world at your disposal and it would change nothing.
The child was born dead.

I'm glad the little guy died, he never had the chance to live
Keeping him alive is Johnny Got His Gun-tier

F
Hopefully they try again

To make the situation worse, once the family found out that he wasn't going to be allowed to travel for treatment, they wanted to take him home so that he could die there with his family. The courts denied even that.

Second pic is the judge. He looks like a goddamn weasel.

With Kek as my witness, I'll see you hang.

How can a genetic disorder be tested on animals?

The same, SHITTY system you mean?

There's a reason people from other countries move to ours to get treatment, it's because they want to
BE ALIVE

Tardbabies don't really count. They are useless to the race.

My fellow Brits need to pull their heads out of their arses.

The legal precedent is set. The state owns your children. The state decides what is best for them. The state decides when they will live and die.

Hue hue hue. Ghcq absolutely sucks at their jobs beyond recognition. Not only are they permitted to do whatever they fucking want. They have near limitless resources/money, A.I data centers to rival jewgle, and legions of underpaid shills.

They still barely scrape by at effectiveness inspite of such. Sure does make them quick to react though.

Now just for a test imagine what would happen if Holla Forums had access to limitless zog cash and a single A.I. Holla Forums would own the world within the month. But all the ghcq can do is react quickly to shill against it's own survival interests.

Did those whites at the ghcq ever ask them selves who is going to pay them once shitskins or globalists rule over them? No one, they will be killed if they are white.
This is the worst time in history to be married or having kids. What fucking irony. It's too bad the globalists in europe own the chattell that are human youngin studs and whores till age 18.

If I had to guess where this is going (((they))) are going to turn europe into a even worse weimer republic than the USA.

Cool story bro

It seems socialistic health care works fine in a state where niggers are a minority.

I'm actually afraid of this happening. I intend to redpill my kids when they get old enough. Suppose their teacher or one of their friends's parents rats me out to the authorities and they take my kids away?

...

kys it's shit OC

...

Becouse the baby would have died if moved becouse of his condition.
Can't you get that through your thick lolberg skull.
The government might be corrupt and owned by jews but doctors still have a say in their patients. And those were the ones that convinced the courts.

Becouse in the opposite case, the parents could sue the hospital for killing the baby.

You breed animals with said disorder.
Or a similar one. Rats are used for this all the time.
You can buy rats with all kinds of disorders and that are almost guaranteed to develop particular kinds of cancers, literally right off the shelf.
Or you can have new strains developed to order if what you want is not already available/

But basic animal testing is also done just to make sure the meds are not in themselves dangerous.

if they had started having kids when they were younger it wouldn't be such a big deal…

We have a winner, this is what happens when you wait and then your kid is born retarded.

Age isn't the primary factor.
They're both carriers for a defective gene. 50% chance of a child being a carrier. 25% it has the condition.

He did die… His days were numbered. By sentencing the child to death the courts made any other outcome impossible. Letting the child die at home would have been a comfort, if not to the child, then to the family spurned by it's government and told "sorry, your child has to die because socialist healthcare."

t. mudslime who couldn't babyfuck Charlie.

The child was dead because his condition was untreatable.
Despite what snake oil salesmen in the USA have to say.

And moving him would have probably killed him pretty much immediately causing considerable pain in the process.

This. Keeping a severely disabled child alive is the ultimate cuckery.

If he hadn't died, if they had dumped millions of dollars into one child, if the treatment had worked…
He still would have been a non functional retard.

i don't understand why people want to keep genetic failures alive. Our ancestors, bless their souls, exposed the weak to the elements and let them die.