Arguments needed against voluntary euthanasia

[Vera_Ljuba]

The State isn’t God. No one chooses to be born and no one who is in their right mind should get to choose when they die. Especially for no particular reason.

Are you someone who is qualified to decide who is in their “right mind”? And also the “reason” for their decision is not available to you, or anyone else. So it is not a good idea to judge how serious their reason might be.

BTW it is quite amusing that you keep avoiding the answer to my simple question. How would you react if some nanny-state or some do-gooder would insist that they are qualified to make decisions for you? Why are you so shy to answer?

 

[edwest2]

Are you someone who is qualified to decide who is in their “right mind”? And also the “reason” for their decision is not available to you, or anyone else. So it is not a good idea to judge how serious their reason might be.

BTW it is quite amusing that you keep avoiding the answer to my simple question. How would you react if some nanny-state or some do-gooder would insist that they are qualified to make decisions for you? Why are you so shy to answer?

I was hospitalized twice, and in two emergency rooms on the same day. Plenty of people made decisions for me. I worked in a hospital for nearly 10 years and plenty of people made decisions for others. I watched a person dying. There were at least 3 doctors in the room doing everything they could. The patient died. No abstract concepts there.

This whole assisted killing idea is wrong.

Ed

 

[CHRISTINE77]

Suicide also is a sin. You just need to be pressed more to reach to the point of your breakdown and performs sin/suicide.

Yes it is a sin. A grave sin. I am surprised to hear you say this.

 

[CHRISTINE77]

Are you someone who is qualified to decide who is in their “right mind”? And also the “reason” for their decision is not available to you, or anyone else. So it is not a good idea to judge how serious their reason might be.

BTW it is quite amusing that you keep avoiding the answer to my simple question. How would you react if some nanny-state or some do-gooder would insist that they are qualified to make decisions for you? Why are you so shy to answer?

That’s exactly what Netherlands does. It decides if you should die by euthanasia. Did you not read about the 41 year old alcoholic who was euthanized in Netherlands? I posted it a few posts back. Talk about your Evil Nanny!! Check it out.

 

[CHRISTINE77]

I was hospitalized twice, and in two emergency rooms on the same day. Plenty of people made decisions for me. I worked in a hospital for nearly 10 years and plenty of people made decisions for others. I watched a person dying. There were at least 3 doctors in the room doing everything they could. The patient died. No abstract concepts there.

This whole assisted killing idea is wrong.

Ed

Doctors are supposed to save lives, not end lives. Hippocratic oath I believe…

 

[Vera_Ljuba]

I was hospitalized twice, and in two emergency rooms on the same day. Plenty of people made decisions for me. I worked in a hospital for nearly 10 years and plenty of people made decisions for others. I watched a person dying. There were at least 3 doctors in the room doing everything they could. The patient died. No abstract concepts there.

We still do not see eye to eye. Of course you are ready to allow others to make decisions for you, IF your and their aim is the same, and they are more knowledgeable than you are. Of course you relinquish the control in these circumstances.

But the question about voluntary euthanasia is different. The person wants to die, but is unable to carry out his wish. He asks to be put out of his misery. And you advocate to override his wish. Again, how would you feel if others would override your express wish - no matter what your wish might be? That is the question for which I cannot receive an answer.

This whole assisted killing idea is wrong.

Only for those who not respect the other party’s wish.

 

[Vera_Ljuba]

That’s exactly what Netherlands does. It decides if you should die by euthanasia. Did you not read about the 41 year old alcoholic who was euthanized in Netherlands? I posted it a few posts back. Talk about your Evil Nanny!! Check it out.

No, I have not seen it. Repost the link, please. I am unable to answer without the details.

 

[edwest2]

We still do not see eye to eye. Of course you are ready to allow others to make decisions for you, IF your and their aim is the same, and they are more knowledgeable than you are. Of course you relinquish the control in these circumstances.

But the question about voluntary euthanasia is different. The person wants to die, but is unable to carry out his wish. He asks to be put out of his misery. And you advocate to override his wish. Again, how would you feel if others would override your express wish - no matter what your wish might be? That is the question for which I cannot receive an answer.

Only for those who not respect the other party’s wish.

Please stop the Marketing Campaign. You don’t need my permission to do anything but you want the State to step in and make it legal. The answer is still no.

This isn’t about respect. This is about killing. The State already overrode the people on a few things, and now some people are pushing for another State sponsored end-run.

Ed

 

[CHRISTINE77]

No, I have not seen it. Repost the link, please. I am unable to answer without the details.

It is post 33. Mark Langedijk said that his life was full of misery and suffering due to his battle with alcoholism

A doctor in the Netherlands has performed the euthanasia of an alcoholic who claimed his addiction had turned his life into a “cocktail” of misery.

In possibly the first documented case of euthanasia for alcoholism, Mark Langedijk, a 41-year-old father of two children, was given a lethal injection by his GP.

catholicherald.co.uk/news…ing-alcoholic/

I found this over on the World News forum.

 

[ericc]

Whatever one calls it, I think we have not clearly say what is right or wrong with killing oneself. We see the reasons given for it, terminally ill, pain, despair, etc but what is moral or immoral about terminating one’s life, secular or religious arguments please?

Does it boils down to “right over one’ s body” or something else? The right over one’s body explanation was given for abortion. What if one were to amputate some body part or sell a kidney or whatever part that one decides. If one has complete right over one’s body I can foresee one arguing for right to die to raise funds for selling body parts so that one’s family may benefit.

Or is the right to die conditional upon the state of the person, mind or body impairment?

Religiously speaking (Christianity) , God has sovereign right of your life. In other religions, attribute it to one’s karma/fate.

In a society where communism/totalitarian/king decides who live or die, obviously there is no individual rights to speak of. In a democratic country, can a majority decides who to die or live because a citizen has violated some “law”? In a democratic country, was such authority given to the individual to decide for himself that he can do it regardless of the reasons? Where does that authority comes from?

 

[tonyrey]

Whatever one calls it, I think we have not clearly say what is right or wrong with killing oneself. We see the reasons given for it, terminally ill, pain, despair, etc but what is moral or immoral about terminating one’s life, secular or religious arguments please?

Does it boils down to “right over one’ s body” or something else? The right over one’s body explanation was given for abortion. What if one were to amputate some body part or sell a kidney or whatever part that one decides. If one has complete right over one’s body I can foresee one arguing for right to die to raise funds for selling body parts so that one’s family may benefit.

Or is the right to die conditional upon the state of the person, mind or body impairment?

Religiously speaking (Christianity) , God has sovereign right of your life. In other religions, attribute it to one’s karma/fate.

In a society where communism/totalitarian/king decides who live or die, obviously there is no individual rights to speak of. In a democratic country, can a majority decides who to die or live because a citizen has violated some “law”? In a democratic country, was such authority given to the individual to decide for himself that he can do it regardless of the reasons? Where does that authority comes from?

In a Godless universe rights are merely human conventions… There is no **reason **why
one shouldn’t kill oneself or others…

 

[CHRISTINE77]

Church teaching on suicide is that anyone who commits a mortal sin and does not repent before death goes to hell. Mortal sin requires three conditions: grave matter, full knowledge of the gravity of the action, and full and free consent to the action. If any of those three conditions are missing, there is not mortal sin.

All we can say for certain is that suicide constitutes grave matter. Given the fact that people who take their own lives often are very ill or under psychological stress, those factors can impede their knowledge and consent, making their actions tragic but not mortally sinful. Only someone who freely chooses to commit suicide with full knowledge of the gravity of the sinfulness would commit mortal sin by his suicide. Even then, between unconsciousness and final death, God might offer the person one final chance to repent, even if such an opportunity is not apparent to us.

The person who administers the euthanasia however is clearly a murderer and in mortal sin because he knows that killing another human being is a grave matter, has full knowledge of the gravity of the action, and has given full and free consent to the action.

 

[spiderweb]

It is a subjective, “emotional” harm and they have to deal with it. My first and foremost duty and obligation is to myself. The alleged quote from Cain still stands: “I am not my brother’s keeper”.

Keep in mind that we cannot know what is in another adult’s best interest. Respect their decisions, if you demand that other people should respect yours.

“Emotional” harm is very real and it can not be measured. You can not say just because it is immeasurable that it should not be considered. When a person is murdered, the family members of the victim can sue for emotional trauma caused. Even though it is an un-quantifiable amount, they usually receive some amount of money in compensation. We do not know the emotional effects that could last a lifetime that they “have to deal with” from legal voluntary euthanasia.

In many cases emotional trauma is more painful than physical pain. I can know that it is not in another persons best interest to cause them emotional trauma that I can not know the long lasting effects on. Just because I don’t know the lasting effects, doesn’t mean that they don’t exist.

You seem to say that the state should allow one person to kill themselves at the expense of harming others. It may not cause long lasting repercussions to others in every case, but can you supply any data that says it does not in all cases?

Conclusions: Legalizing PAS has been associated with an increased rate of total suicides relative to other states and no decrease in nonassisted suicides. This suggests either that PAS does not inhibit (nor acts as an alternative to) nonassisted suicide, or that it acts in this way in some individuals but is associated with an increased inclination to suicide in other individuals.
medscape.com/viewarticle/852658

This suggests the emotional trauma directly can lead to an increased inclination to suicide in others.

Should the state really legalize something that is at least linked to causing the death of another person. Many people drink and drive without harming another person. But the potential is there. The potential is also there for assisted euthanasia causing another persons death and who knows the trauma that it does cause besides that.

 

[tonyrey]

We still do not see eye to eye. Of course you are ready to allow others to make decisions for you, IF your and their aim is the same, and they are more knowledgeable than you are. Of course you relinquish the control in these circumstances.

But the question about voluntary euthanasia is different. The person wants to die, but is unable to carry out his wish. He asks to be put out of his misery. And you advocate to override his wish. Again, how would you feel if others would override your express wish - no matter what your wish might be? That is the question for which I cannot receive an answer.

Only for those who not respect the other party’s wish.

1. Is a person’s wish **always **the most important consideration?
2. Do people **never **change their minds?
3. Is the effect of voluntary euthanasia on others totally insignificant?
4. Is misery the worst of all evils?
5. Are we ever justified in making another person **responsible **for our death?

 

[STT]

Doctors are supposed to save lives, not end lives. Hippocratic oath I believe…

Well, you can do grave sin, suicide if you have done sin. Everything is matter of situation. You of course can resist until you reach your maximum potential.

 

[CHRISTINE77]

Well, you can do grave sin, suicide if you have done sin. Everything is matter of situation. You of course can resist until you reach your maximum potential.

I have NO idea what you are talking about or how it relates to my comments. Please explain.

 

[CHRISTINE77]

We still do not see eye to eye. Of course you are ready to allow others to make decisions for you, IF your and their aim is the same, and they are more knowledgeable than you are. Of course you relinquish the control in these circumstances.

But the question about voluntary euthanasia is different. The person wants to die, but is unable to carry out his wish. He asks to be put out of his misery. And you advocate to override his wish…

Why should a doctor, who is sworn to preserve life, have to become a murderer? This seems extremely upside-down and evil.

 

[STT]

I have NO idea what you are talking about or how it relates to my comments. Please explain.

I asked you whether you have ever sinned and you answered yes. Why? Because you just couldn’t resist it. The same apply to grave sin, suicide.

 

[CHRISTINE77]

I asked you whether you have ever sinned and you answered yes. Why? Because you just couldn’t resist it. The same apply to grave sin, suicide.

So? What is your point?

 

[Bradski]

It is post 33. Mark Langedijk said that his life was full of misery and suffering due to his battle with alcoholism

A doctor in the Netherlands has performed the euthanasia of an alcoholic who claimed his addiction had turned his life into a “cocktail” of misery.

In possibly the first documented case of euthanasia for alcoholism, Mark Langedijk, a 41-year-old father of two children, was given a lethal injection by his GP.

catholicherald.co.uk/news…ing-alcoholic/

I found this over on the World News forum.

This is an excellent example of why it shouldn’t be allowed. I really can’t imagine anyone being given permission do this for a problem such as alcoholism. That is a treatable condition – to a certain extent. A friend is an alcoholic and he simply doesn’t drink. Well, I say simply, but I don’t know how difficult it could be for him.

If there was a move to legalise it in Australia, I would support it. But…I would want guarantees that it wouldn’t be extended to cases such as this. I’m not exactly a fan of slippery slope arguments, but this is an example of where one needs to draw a very definite line in the sand. But then, of course, who makes the decision where that line is actually drawn.

That said, Vera has made the point that one should make personal decisions personally. If it comes to a point where I have to consider it myself (and I hope it never does – at least for a very long time yet), then I will be the one making the call. Naturally after discussing it with my family.