What do you all think about Euthanasia?

[chickened]

I can't quote on this device, but as for the spay and neuter remark, the topic is about voluntary euthanasia. Trying to make a comparison to forced procedures is misleading at best.
Also of note, voluntary tube tying and sexual organ removals are indeed legal. You don't even have to do them yourself.

And so is comparing people to animals misleading ...at best. Do the animals want to be put to sleep?... forced maybe? hmmm... just thinking out loud.

 

[chickened]

If that is the case they would you argue that a true Christian should never go to a hospital?

They should just put their faith in God to heal them. It would then be wrong to even have an operation, dental work or a vaccination. Where do you draw the line? Some Christian denominations think its wrong to get a blood transfusion on these grounds.

The issue here is people should be allowed the choice. If you don't agree with it yourself, then you can choose not to do it.

Should we then rescind "freedom of religion"? I am not a person who ignores good modern medicine but then again doctors killing patients is not modern medicine but an old heathen practice. I am uncomfortable with someone making a living doing mercy killings, sorry.

 

[chickened]

Before the Dutch version of euthanasia I was pro after I am totally against it it is believed that half of the people being killed are being killed against their will.
http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/se...-misses-stories-on-do-not-euthanize-me-cards/
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1518583.stm
When elderly peole are being made scared to go into hospital because they don't want to come out in a coffin doctors have been given too much power.

Not to mention the botched ones.

 

[chickened]

If we base our laws on "God's Laws" we are in for some very strange times. "God's Law's" vary with every religion and belief system, and even vary within a greater grouping of religion. Sunnis and Shia can't agree to the same "God's Laws", neither can Catholic and Protestant Christians or Orthodox and Reform Jews. Even within Protestant groups people can't agree. The Episcopal Church allows gay marriage and ordains gays, the Southern Baptist Church says that gay marriage is against God, and that practicing gays are activiely sinning.

Most people who promote using "God's Laws" for a country's laws are usually only interested using their particular interpretation of God.

Then it would do a government well to decide which God they want to follow and pull their laws from that. You do not have to like or be a Christian to see there are good principles in that religion. Where do you think "though shall not murder" came from in the US laws? Who's name is on the manifesto on the Supreme Court building? All our laws concerning human life emanate from a Judeo Christian background and have done us well in protecting those most vulnerable... until of lately when we try and change those laws. I think our Constitution says "inalienable rights endowed by the Creator"

We have managed to pass laws than kill the unborn and the elderly who do you suppose is next?...as we digress. Does killing aterminally ill 8 year old child sound palatble? would you give her the injection? if it were your daughter or son? or would you fight for a cure? PAS is not just for the old, how would anyone look a child in the eye and say sorry honey, would you like to be put to sleep?... think about that next time you talk to your child.

Making laws from man's wisdom is worse... the blind leading the blind. Only human arrogance suggests otherwise really.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Kevorkian

Seems Kevorkian never thought it was a good idea either... liver cancer is painful and slow.

Take the time and read some of the things this guy did and the fact that 60% of those he killed were not terminal or in pain.

 

[thaiturkey]

If we base our laws on "God's Laws" we are in for some very strange times. "God's Law's" vary with every religion and belief system, and even vary within a greater grouping of religion. Sunnis and Shia can't agree to the same "God's Laws", neither can Catholic and Protestant Christians or Orthodox and Reform Jews. Even within Protestant groups people can't agree. The Episcopal Church allows gay marriage and ordains gays, the Southern Baptist Church says that gay marriage is against God, and that practicing gays are activiely sinning.

Most people who promote using "God's Laws" for a country's laws are usually only interested using their particular interpretation of God.

Quite so.

Religious creeds are too often hijacked by the power hungry (such as Putin recently) and used by those who can't be bothered to think things through for themselves or accept that we simply don't know. I don't care until they arrogantly ram it in my face as if it's fact and the kick off when I exercise my right to disagree. The only worthwhile creed is one of compassion and fairness to others.

 

[mom'sfolly]

As for the Constitution. It never, ever mentions God, the Creator or any such thing. I've posted this several times. See for yourself.

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html

The only place in the Constitution that religion is even mentioned is in the Bill of Rights. It is mentioned with freedom of speech, and press.

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html

Also, virtually every religion has provisions about morals, and most are fairly similar at their cores. Treat people decently, don't lie, cheat, steal, or kill, worship god,etc.

Freedom of worship also means the freedom from worship. In the case of laws, this means we are not subjected to one religion's version of the truth. This means any argument for or against something that starts with "God/The Bible/The Koran/etc says" is not legitimate legal argument.

The Constitution of the US says I don't have to follow religious laws, and quite frankly I wouldn't want to live in a theocracy.

 

[jak2002003]

Then it would do a government well to decide which God they want to follow and pull their laws from that. You do not have to like or be a Christian to see there are good principles in that religion. Where do you think "though shall not murder" came from in the US laws? Who's name is on the manifesto on the Supreme Court building? All our laws concerning human life emanate from a Judeo Christian background and have done us well in protecting those most vulnerable... until of lately when we try and change those laws. I think our Constitution says "inalienable rights endowed by the Creator"

We have managed to pass laws than kill the unborn and the elderly who do you suppose is next?...as we digress. Does killing aterminally ill 8 year old child sound palatble? would you give her the injection? if it were your daughter or son? or would you fight for a cure? PAS is not just for the old, how would anyone look a child in the eye and say sorry honey, would you like to be put to sleep?... think about that next time you talk to your child.

Making laws from man's wisdom is worse... the blind leading the blind. Only human arrogance suggests otherwise really.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Kevorkian

Seems Kevorkian never thought it was a good idea either... liver cancer is painful and slow.

Take the time and read some of the things this guy did and the fact that 60% of those he killed were not terminal or in pain.

I do not think that a government should even consider what God they want to help base their laws on. The modern government need to consider humans beings at a group, which includes many different religions, beliefs, customs and cultures. No one has the right to take over and impose their personal faith beliefs on others. Some people do not even believe there is a god at all. If your country has the law about, thou shall not kill, then why do you have the death penalty and why do you kill animals? The original religion of America was not Christianity but belonged to the native people, who were treated very badly by Christians and had that religion forced upon them. What if you had been born in India, or Thailand into a Buddhist or Hindu family, they your religion would be different and you would be saying that one was the one to base laws on.......but...........

this debate is about Euthanasia, not about gods and religions and which one is the best. I respect your religious views and can see that for you euthanasia is not an option for yourself.

I think we all need to get back on focus about euthanasia and keep away from religion as this is a very delicate subject and a different debate.

 

[cassie]

Should we then rescind "freedom of religion"? I am not a person who ignores good modern medicine but then again doctors killing patients is not modern medicine but an old heathen practice. I am uncomfortable with someone making a living doing mercy killings, sorry.

Ever take care of a terminal patient with uncontrollable, unending, excruciating pain? It is not fun. There are many worse things than dying, believe me. Being kept artificially alive is one of them. Being in constant pain with no end in sight is another. Personally, this is my worst nightmare. That and being paralyzed. I have a living will and that would help some. And I hope that if I were ever in that situation that those near and dear to me would find a way to help me by ending my suffering permanently and do it in such a way that they would not suffer legal consequences.

I have a very old medical book. It was printed in the mid 1800's, and it was for doctors, not lay personnel. It tells how to formulate all kinds of medicines, the ingredients for each, their uses, and the dosages. What interested me was the section on opium. Reading between the lines, it was clear that is how physicians of the day eased their terminal patients from this world into the next.

 

[redhen]

Yes..that's how they still do it today with morphine. It lowers your resps ..the nurses know when to give that last dose.

 

[chickened]

As for the Constitution. It never, ever mentions God, the Creator or any such thing. I've posted this several times. See for yourself.

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html

The only place in the Constitution that religion is even mentioned is in the Bill of Rights. It is mentioned with freedom of speech, and press.

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html

Also, virtually every religion has provisions about morals, and most are fairly similar at their cores. Treat people decently, don't lie, cheat, steal, or kill, worship god,etc.

Freedom of worship also means the freedom from worship. In the case of laws, this means we are not subjected to one religion's version of the truth. This means any argument for or against something that starts with "God/The Bible/The Koran/etc says" is not legitimate legal argument.

The Constitution of the US says I don't have to follow religious laws, and quite frankly I wouldn't want to live in a theocracy.

It is actually in the Declaration of Independance... I will not go into detaIl as to the connection of that and the Constitution.

Freedom of religion is in the Constitution and second to speech.


http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=7&article=2556 Might want to rethink your analysis.