‘Gloria Macapagal Arroyo must get 2nd opinion in New York’!Not AGAIN?

[monroy]

---

It would not be meaningless, it would mean that one had made a lapse in judgement.

It's meaningless because one made a lapse in judgment by presuming to make an informed choice when a choice shouldn't have been made based on speculation.

what "false premises" do you speak of?

I mentioned them in my post.

have you read the magna carta of patient's rights, by our very own Philippine Medical Association? (click on the link for reference)

Magna Carta of patient's rights are not constitutional rights.

In option 1, i purposely said "risking escape from judgement" which puts responsibilty for her possible escape on the person making the choice rather than the authorities.

That makes option 1 as invalid as option 2.

how about i put a higher clause of responsibilty on option 1: "with the loss of justice on our hands."? how is that for fairness? let us agree that: there is no assumption of innocence or guilt. or of sickness. or of health. the question here is "what is morally safer?". [1]let her get treatment she desires: would you risk her escaping, running away from her crimes which she may have or may have not committed? [2]let her face trial first: would you risk causing her death because of your refusal to let her seek this "treatment" of a condition which she may or may not have?

please note both options have heavy moral responsibilities that come with them. it is perception of this "heaviness" that differs.

There's nothing more that can be added to this discussion. If you want to ask a survey type question then you should avoid leading questions. I just wanted to give my reason why I can't answer your question. If others disagree they can always go ahead and answer. But maybe nobody has answered because they also don't get the point of making speculative value judgments. Just my 2c...

How can you avoid leading questions? - PsychWiki - A Collaborative Psychology Wiki

"A person can avoid leading questions by remaining neutral in their questions and asking questions in manner that does not imply, contain, or suggest a particular response. In other words, a person should ask questions in a manner that does not involve their opinion or expected response. The question should allow for a variety of answers with no one answer being implied as superior to the other."

[kamuri cheng]

wala nay sakit oi..! kabantay mo nga karon ra na migawas iyang mga sakit pg napiit na! pasagdi na siya ug ma tigok..!

[carmicael]

It's meaningless because one made a lapse in judgment by presuming to make an informed choice when a choice shouldn't have been made based on speculation.

there is then our problem. the question is merely "hypothetical". i am expecting answers that are in their very nature, "speculative".

I mentioned them in my post.

i can't seem to find them.

Magna Carta of patient's rights are not constitutional rights.

would you be so kind as to point out where in my previous posts where i said "constitutional rights"?

That makes option 1 as invalid as option 2.

it would not be invalid relative to my need, as they are merely speculative. it is the very purpose of asking the a hypothetical question: to get speculative answers.

There's nothing more that can be added to this discussion.

i agree. this post will be my last response to you.

If you want to ask a survey type question then you should avoid leading questions.

let's remove all traces of bias: risking the life of a person vs risking rendering judgement for crimes that person has commited.

I just wanted to give my reason why I can't answer your question. If others disagree they can always go ahead and answer. But maybe nobody has answered because they also don't get the point of making speculative value judgments. Just my 2c...

maybe one can't answer because one is afraid to make choices that will ultimately be reflected on their own personal values.

How can you avoid leading questions? - PsychWiki - A Collaborative Psychology Wiki

thanks.

let us agree to disagree. good day to you sir.

[willard]

tsktsk strategy pud dah!

[jack_bauer]

at the end of the day, it's the court that will make the decision whether to allow GMA or not...

[struggler]

kadaghanan ana nila akong nabantayan nga mga politics padulong na gani prisohon mag pa sakit2x dayon may unta madayonan nalang na sila...

[salbahis]

order in the court2x.... prosecutor proceed...

[æRLO]

Di man mi parehas nimo nga mo adto ug NYC para lang magpa doctor.

If I got the cash, why wouldn't I?

But seriously, Malacanang is downplaying it's means of extradition. She's a former president, current-serving representative and currently under formal allegations of graft. If that doesn't merit the power of extradition, then I don't know what will. And that is just one of many means for the administration to pull her back in the country.

[canister_sa_puwet]

nus-a kha ni cya ma "deadbol"?

[amingb]

O.T.

Asa naman ang TRUCKLOAD panghambog ni Pnoy nga Evidencia oi .. sige mo ingon nangawat pero bisan isa ka dako wajud ..

Patuoha ko ninyo ug nangawat ug kita namo ug ebedensiya ... lisora anang tuo ta ug tsismis mao raman nay puhonan sa mga politico ...

Palargaha na ninyo oi .. way reason nga dili na mobalik kay himatyon nana si GMA .. maklaro man sa lawas niya ning niwang ug maau ....