Best Friends Forever - Early Access
Added 2024-07-02 18:41:57 +0000 UTCWhat an epic episode!! Really enjoyed Kenny saving the day with his golden PSP 😎
Comments
lmao true!
Tatenda Nyika
2024-07-08 00:53:56 +0000 UTCWell said Jack bro! I agree
Tatenda Nyika
2024-07-08 00:53:47 +0000 UTCSniffing permanent markers can get you high. Probably why the angel is doing it
ARMY_LA-MIGRA
2024-07-06 07:11:16 +0000 UTCI think the value of keeping someone in a vegetative state, is similar to the value of a funeral/wake. It's not about Kenny/the-deceased it's about the loved ones. Having a funeral isn't going to bring back your loved one, or it isn't going to get them into heaven, or have any actual benefit for them. It's about compassion and grieving for those left behind. Keeping Terri/Kenny alive, wasn't about likely practical results. It was about loved ones not being ready to say good bye. It was about hope for a miracle, or the potential for medical technology to progress to bring them back. How would you feel if you pulled someone off life support, and then a few weeks later you hear a story about someone in a similar position making a full recovery after some new technique was tried out? We don't really know what is going on in the brain and the body of someone when they're in that state. Are they in pain? Are they conscious, but unable to show signs of it? Do they feel or think nothing? So are we causing harm by keeping them alive? Or are they not being harmed, and could possibly be revived? At what probabilities of revival, and what level of harm, do we make what decision? Overall, I think it's a complex question, dependent on numerous situational variables, with no right answer. In the Kenny case, I love Stan and Kyle's answer. "We're wrong for the right reasons." They love and care about their friend, and don't want to see him go. There is no better justification than that. But that is also them being selfish.
Daniel M.
2024-07-05 11:49:04 +0000 UTCthis is based around a controversial legal case in the United States at the time, Terry Shaivo was a woman in a vegetative state, her husband wanted to take her off life support, but her parents wanted to keep her on life support.
Jack Hunziker
2024-07-04 04:31:42 +0000 UTCimo there is no point to life in a vegetative state, its essentially just artificially keeping a corpse "technically" alive, but there really isnt a conscious being there anymore if the brain isnt functioning.
Jack Hunziker
2024-07-04 04:29:58 +0000 UTCI got you…. Right to die cases are more specifically like the cases with Dr Kevorkian! Thanks for the clarification.
Erick
2024-07-03 13:26:54 +0000 UTCSorry, but this is one of my favorite South Park episodes, because of how well they handled this topic, so I'm going to be a bit of a stickler. "Right to die" typically refers to situations where a person (or medical professional) takes action to bring about death. So for instance a person with a terminal disease, who either lives in excruciating pain, or on so much pain medication that they can't really function. If the doctors believe they would naturally live for years, do they have the right to take an injection which would end their life? Right to die, basically means without medical intervention, the person would continue to live. The doctors are helping the person die. This is the opposite. Without medical intervention Kenny, or Terri Schiavo, would have passed. The large, large majority of people would agree that, of course the individual if they are capable can make the decision to receive life saving treatment, or not. You can chose to get chemo, or not, for example. If the patient is incapacitated, and there is no other person speaking for them, the medical team typically continues doing everything they can to save a life. I think most of us can agree there as well. In the Terri Schiavo case, as well as the Kenny case, the situation is a bit more complicated. We don't really have the individuals thoughts or wishes. What we have are two "equally invested" parties with opposite wishes, where medical intervention keep the person alive, and doing nothing would result in them passing. So the questions are who gets to decide husband or parents? Do we lean towards the side of letting nature take it's course, or trying to save a life? Is a vegetative life, actually life? Then throw the various religious and political ideologies into the debate as well, and we end up with just a sad situation on both sides, being used and politicized and played out in front of an audience.
Daniel M.
2024-07-03 10:49:48 +0000 UTCIn the movie, Kenny goes to heaven and gets rejected, and then at the end he gets in. In Scott Tenorman must Die, Kenny dies of laughter and we see his soul leave his body still laughing.
Daniel M.
2024-07-03 10:06:38 +0000 UTCi don’t think people gave the psp the respect it deserved, ahead of its time fosho
austin zeagler
2024-07-03 02:29:39 +0000 UTCHe got revived in the episode Rainforest Shmainforest from season 3. This episode was inspired by the famous real, right to die court case in the US about Terry Sciavo. (I believe her name was.). A woman on a feeding tube in a vegetative state. Her husband wanted to let her die peacefully and her parental wanted her kept alive. Also to be fair I don’t think Kenny didn’t have an opinion on whether to die or not. He just didn’t want to be on TV IF he was in that state. I’d like to believe he probably would prefer to go where he could actually play the PSP, which actually would’ve only been in heaven considering his vegetative condition! 😂
Erick
2024-07-02 21:40:10 +0000 UTC
