A life saved from the madness

Originally posted by stellspalfie
okay, one more try.

imagine the government agrees with you and parents should have the choice. how would you go about writing that law? what would it state? how would you clarify what religions and what sins and actions are covered? parents would need to know so they are aware when breaking the law. over to you big guy.

We have the ability to live out our lives already by the laws already in place.
What I think you are asking is where to draw the lines, between state and
liberty. I'd have to give that some thought, to try and balance it. It can be
taken no matter where you draw them for abuse against both state laws
and liberty.

If you would draw some lines, I'd be more than happy to think about your
vision of how it should be too.

My only complaint against things now is sin and force, but as you can and
have imagined things you can protect from one sin and end up with another
it is very complex.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
We have the ability to live out our lives already by the laws already in place.
What I think you are asking is where to draw the lines, between state and
liberty. I'd have to give that some thought, to try and balance it. It can be
taken no matter where you draw them for abuse against both state laws
and liberty.

If you would draw some lines, I'd be ...[text shortened]... imagined things you can protect from one sin and end up with another
it is very complex.
Kelly

my aim is not the argument between state and liberty. but i see it can be a stepping stone to help understand.

my opion is that if a patient is under the age of 18, the doctor should make all attempts to save life. over 18 and the individual should be given the option. in cases where the adult patient cannot make a decision or attempts to save life could lead to more suffering, a meeting should be held by the hospital and the patients family to decide the outcome. if there is not enough time to hold a meeting, the duty head doctor should be responsible for final decision.


your turn.

Originally posted by stellspalfie
my aim is not the argument between state and liberty. but i see it can be a stepping stone to help understand.

my opion is that if a patient is under the age of 18, the doctor should make all attempts to save life. over 18 and the individual should be given the option. in cases where the adult patient cannot make a decision or attempts to save life c ...[text shortened]... hold a meeting, the duty head doctor should be responsible for final decision.


your turn.

If you have nothing but the choice between acting or no, and all you have
are your wits and knowing what needs done, than you do what you need
to do. You don't leave an operation if a pause means death, you do your
job.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
If you have nothing but the choice between acting or no, and all you have
are your wits and knowing what needs done, than you do what you need
to do. You don't leave an operation if a pause means death, you do your
job.
Kelly

agreed, but im looking for how you would construct your opinion on the religious rights of parents as we have been discussing, into some sort of legal context. the reason for this is im interested to know how you are going to define who gets to use their religious beliefs and who doesnt and why its okay to use them in one context and not another.

if all you have is vague ideas then its going to be easy to think up simple logic puzzles that can easily poke holes in it.

I don't understand you Kelly; have you change your mind regarding your position o the girl in the op or not?

Your position earlier i the thread was that the state as wrong to intervene to save her life against the girls wishes but in recent posts you seem to now be moving away from that view.

Originally posted by stellspalfie
agreed, but im looking for how you would construct your opinion on the religious rights of parents as we have been discussing, into some sort of legal context. the reason for this is im interested to know how you are going to define who gets to use their religious beliefs and who doesnt and why its okay to use them in one context and not another.

if ...[text shortened]... eas then its going to be easy to think up simple logic puzzles that can easily poke holes in it.

My position has remained the same, we are to avoid sin, and not push
anyone else into sin. Each of us will given an account to God for all the
things we say and do, nothing we do even in secret will kept there, instead
it will all be brought out into the light. We will be judged on how we live
our lives in secret, in public, and give an account.

So that said, I respect the beliefs of others just because it is thier beliefs.
If my beliefs are to be respected, so to everyone else! You have questioned
me and I have answered you and everyone else here. A heart felt belief
from a caring parent I'll take over everyone else, period. Does that mean
we will always only get good choices as we see them, no. I believe Doctors
too have heart felt beliefs and they too will stand before God and given an
account. Will the parents and doctors beliefs stand at odds from time to
time, yes.

I can I even tell you I believe parents are always right, or that doctors
are always right, such is not the case. There will be times that I will agree
with the doctors, other the parents, neither time when I think we are going
against heart felt beliefs do I think it is a small matter.

I grant to you that time after time in this discussion people have looked for
and made up the worse possible religious reasons make me look bad. I get
that with some their hate for religion compels that, they cannot help
themselves.

If I have to default I will default towards the family, but understand that
there are examples that isn't the best option, and there will be times that
we will disagree on when those times are.
Kelly