Euthanasia

Originally posted by twhitehead
I disagree. Anyone who genuinely believes in an afterlife should have few reservations if they believe that afterlife will be a good one. Why does one need to be called an 'extremist' just because they believe in heaven?
Are you not going to paradise, or are you an extremist to?

Wasn't it obvious that by "religious extremists" I was referring to those who are prepared to easily give their life in suicide attacks because they believe there is a special afterlife awaiting them. Perhaps it wasn't obvious.

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
wolfgang, as a believer in Christ who has been taught the scriptures from the original languages by four pastor/teachers since my youth, I know with certainty that my life and times are squarely in God's Omnipotent Hands. Nothing will take me home [including near death paralysis in December 2010] to be with Him, Evelyn, my Christian parents and f ...[text shortened]... ill keep me here one nano second longer once His plan and purpose for my life is fulfilled. -Bob

BUMP for Grampy Bobby.

What did it mean then when you said you'd "rather die" than make a mistake over interpretation of the Bible? Do you believe it would be God's will that you would die for an error of this kind? Or would the fact that YOU would rather die be an issue of your will rather than God's will?

Originally posted by wolfgang59
I am pro euthanasia providing there are enough safeguards.

I think the need for the patient having 'eyes wide open' ~ informed "consent" (as it were) ~ and ensuring that a decision is not pressured or coerced would be two key safeguards that would need to be in place. There would also need to be safeguards for any medical practitioners that might be involved. I think the state should have a clear and mandated role in preventing people who are non compos mentis from ending their lives or having their lives ended by someone else..

Originally posted by FMF
I've been contributing to this forum for years and a can scarcely remember anyone making any jokes about people suffering in pain with horrible diseases. What is the basis for such a claim?

I see you have been chasing josephw down for an answer to his accusation; I doubt if you will get one.

His use of "deist" instead of "FMF" was an immediate giveaway (the cloak draped over the dagger, so to speak), that he was making one of these little nameless jabs that seem quite commonplace from several of the posters here.

It has been awhile since I have been in the forums having been absent due to many medical issues which I won't go into here, but this appeared to be a good topic to make somewhat of a return.

Proponents of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide contend that terminally ill people should have the right to end their suffering with a quick, dignified, and compassionate death. They argue that the right to die is protected by the same constitutional safeguards that guarantee such rights as marriage, procreation, and the refusal or termination of life-saving medical treatment.

Opponents of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide contend that doctors have a moral responsibility to keep their patients alive as reflected by the Hippocratic Oath. They argue there may be a "slippery slope" from euthanasia to murder, and that legalizing euthanasia will unfairly target the poor and disabled and create incentives for insurance companies to terminate lives in order to save money.

Having been exposed to both the best and worst the human condition has to offer (the best being a stranger offering me shelter from the cold streets of Seattle, the worst being seeing thousands of bodies thrown in the streets of genocide torn Rwanda) I am absolutely convinced that all life is sacred and means something.

I think life means something and the decision to end ones life whether it be with or without the help of another is a very serious issue and should not be joked about under any circumstances.

Many different religions have many different views on the afterlife. Some belief in reincarnation so the ending of this life would only quicken ones journey to the next cycle of things. Most sects of Abrahamic Religions would say that there is some form of after life but are also clear on "Thou shalt not kill" which in turn would include oneself. Others belief in the promise of an afterlife that is free of pain and free of suffering, which leads us back to the crux of the argument.

If life is sacred, I believe that it is, we should cling to it with all of our might. I have seen death first hand on a massive scale. It is not pleasant it is not fun it is not to be celebrated, however with that said I cannot quantify others pain and others suffering. I can sit with them and attempt to listen or sit with them and try and offer them comfort, but mental disease runs abound in today's world. I cannot speak for their situation. It would be wrong of me to judge them for wanting to end that pain and suffering particularly if they have never had access to a religious or spiritual belief that would promise the end of suffering and in pain.

Another sign that it is a strange and sad world that we live in today: one does not need to see a doctor to get assistance with these final decisions. There are countless blogs and even step by step guides on various "pain free" ways to do it on youtube. I would think those videos would be blocked, by I digress.

Beau

Originally posted by beauroberts
It has been awhile since I have been in the forums having been absent due to many medical issues which I won't go into here, but this appeared to be a good topic to make somewhat of a return.

Proponents of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide contend that terminally ill people should have the right to end their suffering with a quick, dignified, ...[text shortened]... ee" ways to do it on youtube. I would think those videos would be blocked, by I digress.

Beau

Doctors should not always preserve life at all costs. Sometimes a patient is beyond that and what the medical profession should and does do is relieve pain even at the cost of reducing life expectancy. For me the key thing is dignity - this is a basic entitlement. However I agree with you about euthanasia since that is not a change of emphasis in treatment but a deliberate act of killing. It doesn't matter whether one has a general taxation based system like in the UK or an insurance based system like the US - chronic care patients are vulnerable to being hurried into the next world. There are some cases where euthanasia may be appropriate, but they are so rare that policies shouldn't be made around them. In those rare cases one can use the courts to make the exception. A little secular support for your position. Personally, I will not go gentle into that good night.