For those who support the position of environmentalists, . . .?

that Global Warming is caused by people, should Global Warming Advocates who contract Aids, get Cancer, or are diagnosed with a brain tumor, refuse any treatment on the basis that preventing Global Warming is more important than the needs (or especially the wants) of individuals, and less people means less Global Warming?

Good question. I mean...it is all for the environment, right?

I would settle for them actually DOING rather than saying. For example:
Al Gore's MAIN house is less energy efficient than the (enviromental terrorist, Bush owned) CRAWFORD RANCH!
All of those enviro-nuts fly on private jets and drive SUVs while they preach that we should ride bicycles.
If I were Al Gore, and actually believed the lies I put forth, I would not only set an example, but I would ride a bicycle out of fear of the BS I said.

Global warming has happened over and over again in the life cycle of the Earth, it is naturally occurring! It is happening faster than previously though, so thats the question...are we speeding up Global Warming!!??

YES
Should we refuse treatment etc...NO, its the way in which peoples actions affect the process that is the problem, not the amount of people.

If people had not destroyed much of out atmosphere with pollutants, the much of suffering you mention would NOT be.

If I get cancer, I assure you ... I won't get treatment. There are things I need to speak with God about, face to face.

Maybe the people who pollute the most should be refused treatments.

You probably fall into this category.

That is truly pathetic reasoning鈥攅ven for yahoo.

You know what would really be bad? If a virus infected the granola supply here in the U.S. I for one would be saddened by all of the hippie deaths.

well, a person does need to be healthy to take steps to curb human made global warming....