We study moral issues not to make judgements on people, but to learn what is the right thing to do. Like I wrote earlier, there are euthanasia standards in this that apply. The standards have to apply from all angles, and it’s to help us make better decisions in the future.
I agree with you about asking the hard questions and all that, but there are no “euthanasia standards” that apply to the act of jumping out of the window of a burning building. On page one, you said:
Well, with the exception of those who stumbled out by accident, those who jumped intentionally but unwillingly killed themselves . . . They chose to intentionally kill themselves rather than dying from the given scenario, it would seem. So out of desperation or not, it would have been an intentional act.
They did
not “intentionally” kill themselves, because they wanted to live, so suicide/euthanasia simply doesn’t apply here. Furthermore, the phrase “intentionally but unwillingly” is a tautological contradiction.
Their death was a
foreseen but
unintended consequence of their jumping. That is quite the opposite of killing yourself “intentionally.”
You need to familiarize yourself with the doctrine of double effect.
Look, everyone here sympathises with the people who died that day. Do I have to keep mentioning that as if we’re all kindergarteners? Shouldn’t we be able to discuss these things in intelligent terms, without me constantly having to mention the obvious?
I’m going to humbly suggest - and this goes for me, too, and for anyone who dares have this discussion - that yes, we do need to keep mentioning our sympathies, and no, we should
not be able to discuss this intelligently if we don’t constantly remind ourselves and each other of what should be obvious, if only to be mindful of a horrific reality we do not face as we comfortably type at our computers.
In my opinion, God does not make decisions or judge us on technicalities. I do not think he goes to the jumpers who were murdered by terrorists and tell them they made a sin by jumping out of a burning building because technically they chose to jump instead of burn to death. So no i do not believe it was a sin in any way. They did not chose to jump out becuase they wanted to. They did it because they felt they had to - they were going to die either way. Either way would have been horrible and every time I think of those poor souls, I want to cry. I hope the moment they died, they went into Jesus’ open arms and were comforted.
You’re right, it wasn’t a sin.
But you don’t go far enough. You imply that you’re willing to fudge the rules for the sake of compassion, but we don’t need to rely on “technicalities” to justify their action, and God doesn’t have to wink at them either. What they did was not wrong by Catholic moral theology - the object of the act was acceptable (jumping out of a dangerous building/painful environment), their intention was moral (to escape burning agony), and the circumstances
certainly justified such desperation.
As double effect explains, there
are circumstances that justify
permitting a foreseen evil, which is
all they did. And their jumping does meet the principle’s four criteria, hands down.
Furthermore, they clearly weren’t responsible for their actions psychologically.
But even if they were, their “decision” to jump would have been justified.
This discussion requires two things from all its participants in order for it to be acceptable: acute sensitivity to the victims’ suffering, and a working knowledge of the principle of double effect.
