There isn't any difference between this woman and anorexics other than which way she is trying to go on the scale.

She wants to kill herself? Fine, whatever. She has kids? Sorry moron, your job is raising your kids not stuffing your face.

There will be a point where her medical expenses will become a burden on us (taxpayers) if they aren't already. That's all I care about, and have issue with. If she wants to destroy her family and kill herself I don't really care.

It's a testimony to our disgusting entitlement mentality in the US that we are even discussing this as a possible "right". Of all the things she could apply herself to that would benefit humanity, why would she elect to replace them all with this? Seriously. Anyone asinine enough to devote themselves to this kind of horrific spectacle needs to be ignored, not encouraged.

He uses Linux, so I'm pretty sure that's already a daily occurrence for him..

I will pay for something like this only if she is wearing a latex bodysuit.

Her life, her choice. If she wants to eat herself into oblivion, or starve her self into a skeletal death, or just drink a nice glass of bleach and lye with dinner, that is her decision. I'd be in favor of forcing a psychiatric evaluation to make sure she is of sound mind, but that's it. As long as she isn't hurting anyone, it is her decision. The kids will be affected, but the father is still around to take care of them.

Even in Canada, where her inevitable hefty medical expenses would ultimately be the burden of the taxpayer, I don't think we would have a right to intervene. There are hundreds of ways in which people can make stupid decisions on a consistent basis that endanger them and ultimately cost taxpayers money, and we can't regulate them all.

That being said - as a cost calculation, there are areas that we can recoup the money. Hefty taxes on cigarettes can be justified not only as a disincentive to smoke but as a recouping of inevitable health care costs as a result of long-term smoking. As a smoker, you are essentially investing in your own future health care with every pack of cigarettes bought. I can't begrudge them for that.

I wouldn't mind a similar disincentive/recouping tax for fast food and the like - although that's the start of a very slippery slope that may not be worth it in the end.

Haha this reminds me of Beerfest.

Of course she has the right to do it. She has the right to do anything she likes to herself.

It's bizarre, but this shouldn't be any different if she were, for instance, "just" a smoker. You want to smoke yourself to death, end up in the hospital with emphysema, COPD or cancer, and cost your kids their taxes and their mom? I guess that's your "right", but it doesn't make you any less of a moron.

As Shawn Elliott has said, if it's on the Internet, someone has masturbated to it.

I completely don't get this whole "obesity as disability" business. And I actually resent having to accommodate it. Kevin Smith can kiss my ass.

Count me in on the /agree train.

I'm talking about being so big she can't walk and is home-bound, not the people who are too big for an airplane seat. She is choosing to make herself immobile, as opposed to a small percentage of people who have actual physical problems that trigger vast weight gain.

In at least one way, I am less annoyed with her than I am with the Kevin Smiths. Should she decide to make herself home-bound, her impact on the infrastructure we share is actually less severe. Kevin Smith demands that airlines make seats bigger for everyone (never mind that it would double the cost of airline travel for everyone to accommodate his bad choices). This woman might be costly to the medical system, but I hardly doubt she will survive enough medical emergencies to make major changes in infrastructure necessary.

I bet you would be an awesome guy to have a beer with.