Posted on 12/13/2006 12:27:39 PM PST by Lunatic Fringe
Excellant point.
Do you know when she is going to have a new book? I miss reading them.
Source?
Are you some sort of an authority concerning the terminally ill?
Kevorkian is a nutjob but that does not mean to say that he has no market for his services.
Big time au contraire.
A bit histrionic. Otherwise, a completely pointless post.
Yes, by all means let's have 70-year old grannies with cancer blow their brains out... that's much more moral and humane. [/sarcam]
No it isn't.
You may think it is the act of a coward, but it ain't.
I think that it is wrong and before God I'd never do it, but if you can't see that it takes courage to exit this place voluntarily then you have not thought it through.
The dead are dead, and they are beyond our rationalizations and concerns, even if they were deeply loved.
Your comment indicates to me that you have lived a sheltered life, and that you barely have made it around your local block.
It vexed Hamlet, and it vexes us still today.
Any bets on his committing sewerside?
Every human has the choice to take one's own life.
The Japanese have refined it to a ritual called seppeku.
No one else should choose for another human or "help" in suicide.
That is called homicide.It happens to be against the law, and rightly so.
Kovorkian is a murderer who rationalizes his murders as "relieving sufferiing." Some one should put him to work shooting injurde horses and killing other animals that suffer. He has no place in the arena of a self appointed G_D. That happens to be an occuppied field.
Ok, thats messy. Then let Granny take her pills...all of them at once.
Whats immoral and inhumane is having someone else off Granny.
Right.
Finally, a voice of good Christian reason.
Okay, I'll play ball.
About those going to Hell anyways:
Their suffering in this life is a Paradise to be savoured long and thoroughly because it will be replaced by that which is incomprehensible in the completeness of its mind-shattering agony.
We treat dogs better when they are sick. They are put down when the pain becomes unbearable.
I did watch a family member die of cancer, and another die from Pneumonia. Both took a long time to go, and watching it was extremely painful. But, I was able to spend time with them before they went, and their pain was managed such that they did not die while suffering from pain. I can't speak to what any others have experienced, but giving a mass murderer the right to get out so he can start up his trade again seems horribly wrong to me.
God Bless you for taking a strong stand against this immoral act. I've watched two family members die; one from cancer, the other essentially drowned from pneumonia. I too am AGAINST euthanasia more now than ever. Even more, I'm against allowing this mass murderer out so he can begin his death trade again.
A stunning rebuttal.
I'm convinced.
There are patients who are "terminally" ill for years. What is your definition of it? Careful---it depends on who you talk to---insurance companies (and their hospice bedfellows) usually include just about anyone who claims they are sick---saves them bucks.
Huh? Courage to quit on life? It takes courage to fight to stay alive despite the odds; it does not take courage to give up. A few seconds or less of an act and life is over. Weeks, months, or years of living with what ever ails you takes courage.
You make a valid point and probably the only coherent one worth replying to on this thread. I would argue there is a difference between artifically prolonging life and hastening death (both wrong in different degrees IMO). As medical science advances, more sick people are being kept alive then any other time in our history. It's a real issue.
Beyond that, I would argue the suicide point that people have been committing suicide on their own for thousands of years since time began. No one needs the government's help. Those who argue against an intrusive government are the first ones crying the loudest for this imaginary right to die. This made up "right" is a smokescreen. Any government or institution which has the legal right to kill becomes very, very dangerous. We have a system in debt, Medicare collapse on the horizon and a generation of baby boomers approaching retirement. Couple that with a possible President Hillary and socialized medicine and you get a nightmare beyond anyone's dreams. This issue is NOT about the right to die.
I really couldn't come up with a real rebuttal. I was nearly speechless.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.