 |
 |
THIS IS A SAD DAY FOR THE LIST. Bob Fink has announced that he is leaving us and there has been no comment on his letter. In addition John Cottingham and Barb Patterson have remained silent on the issue. To lose such a valued member of the group- a neurosurgeon and possibly the only practicing MD remaining on the list is indeed our great loss. And especially I think, that all it would have taken is an apology to cut this off. Now the ugly specter of censorship hias reared its head I am fearful that it will continue with others. John Cottingham, I think you are in error by not apologizing to Bob and Bob while I think you are right to demand an apology rather than Censorship aren't you taking it a little far by contacting the Board of trustees of the Uof T and threatening a lawsuit for defamation? Bob and I have disagreed about many things but I have found him to be thoughtful and courteous and respectful of my point of view. John and Barb and I have agreed on most things but I think you are dead wrong on this one. I can understand that you wish to keep controversy on an intellectual basis rather than a personal one and protect the list but aren't the eggs for the omelet already broken? Bob is leaving the list and while I don't intend to leave I will if censorship continues.. I think that is what happens when censorship occurs- more and more people give up contributing and the threads become less and less relevant. The issues of stem cells and abortion have been the major area where Bob and I part company. The issue of when human life begins is what it all boils down to. Bob feels that all life regardless of stage or semblance of humanity is sacred and even though it is growing inside of someone else it is the moral equivalent of murder to terminate a life no matter how primitive . I rationalize this by stating that it more complex than that and that and in making the choice to have an abortion one must take into account the rights of the mother and the circumstances the child will be born into. Nonetheless if I thought that feeling thinking human beings were being killed I would feel it necessary to take action to prevent it. as would most of you (I hope). It comes down to what we are raised to believe , religion if I can mention that here (without censorship)- and how literally one takes the Bible. This is a sensitive area and will not be settled by any legislation or court rulings. With the country being split close to 50-50 neither side will convince the other especially since the genie is out of the bottle now and won't be stuffed back in. Bob - if you want widespread civil disobedience and ignoring of a law along with the tragedy of botched abortions you will see a lot of illegal abortion drugs and abortions being performed just try and pass this one Stem cells I think are quite a different matter since they do not have a chance of becoming human beings (since they come from IVF) I feel that their potential for the relief of suffering and lack of we ever potential humanity should make all but the most avid right to lifer take pause. Bob, I have a great deal more respect for you and your positions because you at least considered the difference between abortion and stem cell research. Bob, I wish that you would consider staying with the List but I understand if you don't. Please keep in touch with me and others who value your opinions. Charlie Charles T. Meyer, MD Middleton, WI Robert A. Fink, M. D. wrote: >I have waited for a number of weeks, this to see if there would be any >"retreat" on the part of the "Administration" of the Parkinsn List, but there >has been none. Similarly, my letter of protest to the Academic Council of the >University of Toronto (which hosts the List), has gone unanswered. >Therefore, what follows will be my final post to the List (assuming that it isn't >censored when it comes under "review", the status which I have been placed >in by Barbara Patterson). > >This issue began over the discussion of stem cells and the ethics related to >such. This matter is no longer the focus of the situation. The electorate of the >USA has, by its majority decision to re-elect President Bush, chosen its >national course over the next four years. My own state, California, passed >Proposition 71 (which I opposed), which has allocated a large sum of money >(from tax revenues) *mandated* to go for stem cell research; money which >will be diverted from other health-related issues, such as care for the >underinsured or uninsured population of California. The voters of California >have chosen their priorities and will, in my opinion, eventually regret their >choice. > >The issue which has resulted in my decision to remove myself from this List >is the fact that, back in September, John Cottingham, a co-owner of the >Parkinsn List, sent a public message which said: > >"Enough has been said about abortion, legal cases and when life begins. >It's humorous really that one of the lists' most vehement proponents to >'Right to Life' also collects fees for removing organs from those on life >support. Never get between someones 'public' persona and their livelihood." > >This was after I, in response to a question raised by another Listmember as to >whether I supported organ donation, replied that I had indeed, worked with >families of brain-dead individuals in order to help other families which >needed organs for transplant purposes. To post words such as quoted above >in a public forum is the worst form of slander. > >When I persisted in demanding a *public* apology, Barbara's response was to >offer to "chat" on MSN Messenger (I do not use such services because they >are virus-prone and attract Spam), and when I continued to ask for that >apology, Barbara placed me "on review" (meaning that all of my posts would >be "censored" before they are released to the List. Since that action, I have >not posted any messages to the Parkinsn List, as I will not participate in a >"censored" List as a matter of principle. > >During the time that I have been a member of this List (I think that it has been >about 10 years), I have seen much vitriol dispensed. In the months before the >recently-completed USA electoral process, there had been many nasty and >disrespectful postings regarding our president, and other governmental >officials by Listmembers who disagree with governmental policies. The >personal attacks by several individuals on the List (you know who you are) >have continued even until now (when the electoral decision is history), and >yet, such people have not been placed "on review". Similarly, other >Listmembers, including myself, who asked that the president and others >elected officials not be made subject to disrespect on the List, were >themselves placed "on review". > >When Barbara cited the "rules" as to indications for placing members "on >review", she stated that my disagreement as to the unrestricted use of >embryonic stem cells for research might negatively affect "fragile members of >this List", and somehow interfere with their "sense of community". When >posts such as made by several other members of this List are accepted (many >of them, like John Cottingham's, being personal attacks), it is unacceptable to >me that my remarks, not directed to an individual, are worthy of censorship. > >The Listowners have every right to construct and maintain their List in any >way that they wish. If they wish to have a "feelgood" structure, where people >can mainly give emotional support to each other, then that is fine. On the >other hand, if this List is to be a source of scientific information concerning >Parkinson's and related conditions (and attract participation by professionals >in the field), it must be understood that some of the information obtained may >not always be "warm and fuzzy", and that significant controversies exist in >the field. I had thought that the "I" in PIEN, stood for "information", and that >this, along with support, was one of the main objectives of this List. > >In summary, it is my position that John Cottingham, by his remarks of >September regarding "removing organs from those on life support" (his >words), has slandered me; and though, in a subsequent note from Barbara, >John is alleged to have said that his remarks were "humorous", I did not >consider them humorous in any way. His continued refusal to apologize (and >since the posting was public, I have insisted that the apology likewise be >public), along with Barbara's decision to "penalize the victim", tell me that I >no longer belong on this List. > >To those with whom I have been associated here for a decade, I wish you the >best of good fortune as you battle, either directly or indirectly, with >Parkinson's disease. > > >Sincerely, > > >Bob Fink > > >********************************************** >Robert A. Fink, M. D., F.A.C.S., P. C. >2500 Milvia Street Suite 222 >Berkeley, California 94704-2636 >Telephone: 510-849-2555 FAX: 510-849-2557 >WWW: http://www.rafink.com/ > >mailto:[log in to unmask] > >"Ex Tristitia Virtus" > >********************************************* > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn