Assisted Suicide!

[KennyJC]

All theists? Some theists? Who knows. Each must do what they do to maintain a clear conscious in the presence of their God.

I'm pretty sure that even in america, a die hard christian would go to hospital if he broke his leg rather than let 'God' heal it. This is interfering with God's will in the same way as euthanasia.

How do you know that medical science is not a gift from God?

It could be, as could euthanasia. I would like God to give me the gift of legally having loved ones put to sleep with dignity if they are doomed to live the rest of their days in unbearable pain and suffering with no quality of life.

Lets turn the coin on it's head here. Is pain and suffering with no quality of life a gift from God? Is he not an asshole for giving us this burden without allowing us to do anything about it? Even if you are right (long shot), and that God does not want us to legalise euthanasia, why should we listen to 'him'?

 

[c20H25N3o]

If someone out of love concedes to someone's wishes to assist bringing the end to that suffering i.e. to cut the time short for the benefit of the person they love, who are we to say that that loving act is invalid?

Your god, that's who.

My God or American Christians? I happen to disagree with Christian's who hold steadfastly to their opinions on euthanasia hence my first sentence in your quote above. How does that sentence make me a hypocrite?

Thanks

c20

 

[(Q)]

I happen to disagree with Christian's who hold steadfastly to their opinions on euthanasia hence my first sentence in your quote above. How does that sentence make me a hypocrite?

Quite simple really. You disagree with Christians, yet you call yourself a Christian. How is that not a hypocrite?

 

[charles cure]

[B


is euthanasia the same as suicide?

Yes. Murder is murder no matter what the fancy name is used.

i know this may seem like splitting hairs, but i would hasten to point out that murder and suicide by definition are two different things. consentual euthanasia cant possibly fit the definition of murder, but possibly could fit the defenition of suicide.

 

[c20H25N3o]

I happen to disagree with Christian's who hold steadfastly to their opinions on euthanasia hence my first sentence in your quote above. How does that sentence make me a hypocrite?

Quite simple really. You disagree with Christians, yet you call yourself a Christian. How is that not a hypocrite?

Let me turn this around. If a scientist disagrees with a scientist, is that scientist no longer a scientist? Christians are not robots that come off of some sort of biblical production line. We can have differing views just as you and I can have differing views. Its about how we deal with those differences that counts.

peace

c20

 

[Avatar]

PLIF begs to disagree

http://plif.andkon.com/

 

[(Q)]

If a scientist disagrees with a scientist, is that scientist no longer a scientist?

No, scientists disagree because one or both may be in error or there isn't enough information to warrant more than one explanation. Once all the evidence is presented, there is no room for disagreement.

Do scientists disagree on the speed of light? Do they disagree on electrodynamics? Do they disagree on relativity?

They may at one point have disagreed, but hard evidence, reality, eventually created no room for disagreement.

But a theist has nothing more than their own versions of reality based on someone elses version of reality, in which to agree or disagree. And what has evidently been presented time and again on these forums is the total lack of agreement on almost every aspect of their beliefs.

Why aren't you Muslim instead? What's wrong with that religion?

 

[(Q)]

We can have differing views just as you and I can have differing views. Its about how we deal with those differences that counts.

Sorry, but that simply cannot be. All Christians, nah, all theists, claim to have been shown by their gods the truth to their beliefs.There can be no disagreement if this premise holds. If so, your god lies to you all.

 

[KennyJC]

Let me turn this around. If a scientist disagrees with a scientist, is that scientist no longer a scientist? Christians are not robots that come off of some sort of biblical production line. We can have differing views just as you and I can have differing views. Its about how we deal with those differences that counts.

peace

c20

In science, that is encouraged. In ten years time, science will be stronger and we will know that much more, because the things we can not agree on will be debated and expermimented on until something new can be observed.

Many fundamental parts of religion have been disproved by science, but it still so far is unwilling to change as a result. For example half the population of America still blindly believe in creation despite the fact it was up to a point been proved wrong by science (or at least happened differently than what the bible tells us). If religion showed the will to change and adapt with the times, it would at least have some respect from me. If we can already prove that large parts of religion are fantasy, why not believe that the other parts are fantasy too?

 

[Adstar]

Adstar: Is the dying person not asking for mercy? To be frowned upon when asking for mercy would be the ultimate kick in the teeth dont you think?

This is a black and white issue. Murder is murder. If you seek to justify murder then you take part in this form of murder.

EDIT: If someone out of love concedes to someone's wishes to assist bringing the end to that suffering i.e. to cut the time short for the benefit of the person they love, who are we to say that that loving act is invalid?

We say? It has nothing what so ever to do with what we say. Its what the scriptures say. God decides when we are born and God decides when we die. It is His call.




All Praise The Ancient Of Days

 

[Adstar]

Sorry, but that simply cannot be. All Christians, nah, all theists, claim to have been shown by their gods the truth to their beliefs.There can be no disagreement if this premise holds. If so, your god lies to you all.

Your premise is absolutely false. God has a will for us. Just because many rebel against that will and seek to justify what they reason to be right does not make the source of the lie God. The source is the person who has twisted the truth.



All Praise The Ancient Of Days

 

[c20H25N3o]

This is a black and white issue. Murder is murder. If you seek to justify murder then you take part in this form of murder.

If you drove over a cat and that cat was still alive but barely, would you put it out of its misery or would you leave it to suffer in excrutiating pain until God had decided it had suffered enough?

We say? It has nothing what so ever to do with what we say. Its what the scriptures say. God decides when we are born and God decides when we die. It is His call.

I think you negate man as one of God's tools far too quickly. Yes God decides but the methods he chooses to employ are his business and are not restricted by your thinking.

Thanks

c20

 

[audible]

This is a black and white issue. Murder is murder. If you seek to justify murder then you take part in this form of murder.

so when your god kills, your aiding and abeting, so your just as guilty.

We say? It has nothing what so ever to do with what we say. Its what the scriptures say. God decides when we are born and God decides when we die. It is His call.

but he's still a murderer.

 

[KennyJC]

God decides when we are born and God decides when we die. It is His call.

Prove it.

Just because many rebel against that will and seek to justify what they reason to be right does not make the source of the lie God

How can you rebel against something which probably doesn't exist? And for sure, how can you rebel against your version God which clearly does not exist. By not putting my teeth under the pillow, am I rebelling against the toothfairy?

 

[(Q)]

Yes God decides but the methods he chooses to employ are his business and are not restricted by your thinking.

Case in point, eh c2? Just can't decide amongst yourselves? hehe

 

[Adstar]

If you drove over a cat and that cat was still alive but barely, would you put it out of its misery or would you leave it to suffer in excrutiating pain until God had decided it had suffered enough?

Of cource i would kill it if i did not have a means to end its misery. Cats are not people.

I think you negate man as one of God's tools far too quickly. Yes God decides but the methods he chooses to employ are his business and are not restricted by your thinking.

Thanks

c20

Once again. It is not my thinking.

And God does use people as implements of His wrath. He used the Jews against the cananites and He used the babylonians against the jews. The first He ordered the second He allowed. So your wrong. I do believe God uses men and allows men to kill when it suits Him.




All Praise The Ancient Of Days

 

[c20H25N3o]

Yes God decides but the methods he chooses to employ are his business and are not restricted by your thinking.

Case in point, eh c2? Just can't decide amongst yourselves? hehe

Why dont you just contribute to the debate instead of this petty attempt at point scoring?

I think it is a very very difficult issue to come up with a solution that is going to be acceptable to everyone. No one can argue that life isn't the greatest thing we have and no one can claim to be the author of their own birth.

God has shown me compassion in my life and has answered prayers where I thought I was all out of hope. The person who is in so much pain that they cannot conceive of enduring one more day is surely praying for their death to come soon. The reasons for that prayer may not be even focused on their own release but rather the release of those who care for them.
In any case I refute that if one acts in love and compassion with all good intention that they ought not be condemned for it.

For example an inspired Moses wrote 'Thou Shalt Not Kill' and we agree with the law. Moses' law also required that the adulteress be stoned to death which flies in the face of the law we agree with that says 'Thou Shalt Not Kill'.

Now Jesus looked at all those getting ready to stone the adulteress and said 'Well whoever is without sin may cast the first stone.' - Jesus was demonstrating God's compassion and understanding and patience, attributes of God that had never been sought by those who were willing to stone the adulteress to death.

I think too often we prefer to see the letter of the law without taking into account God's true nature.
To stone the adulteress was a complete no brainer for the people in Jesus' time. thats what the law required. Jesus turned that on its head and asked the woman if anyone continued to condemn her after they had all dispersed. When she replied 'no' he replied 'neither do I'. Jesus had compassion for the woman even though the law required she be stoned to death.

What I am saying is ... it is not black and white. It is a matter of conscious for the people involved.

peace
c20

 

[Adstar]

so when your god kills, your aiding and abeting, so your just as guilty.
but he's still a murderer.

Your getting the words Kill and murder mixed up.

Murder is illegal killing.

While execution is legal killing.

Killing is a neutral word it can be both legal and proper or illegal and evil.

God is a perfect Judge therefore He can never commit murder (illegal killing)

As for me aiding and abetting that just does not make sense? God does not need my help to end a person’s life.

All Praise The Ancient of Days

 

[Streamline]

Your getting the words Kill and murder mixed up.

Murder is illegal killing.

While execution is legal killing.

Killing is a neutral word it can be both legal and proper or illegal and evil.

God is a perfect Judge therefore He can never commit murder (illegal killing)

As for me aiding and abetting that just does not make sense? God does not need my help to end a person’s life.

All Praise The Ancient of Days

Who decides what is illigal killing or not. NOT YOU. If assisted suicide is made legal, which it is in Switzerland for example, then it is not illigal killing. End of discussion.

 

[(Q)]

Why dont you just contribute to the debate instead of this petty attempt at point scoring?

I just pointed out that your beliefs are false based on adstars and your own words. That's a pretty big point, don't ya think?

I think it is a very very difficult issue to come up with a solution that is going to be acceptable to everyone

Irradicating religion is acceptable.

God has shown me compassion in my life and has answered prayers where I thought I was all out of hope.

Resorting to delusion and fantasy does not make your case valid. An entire discussion on answered prayers has shown prayer to be completely useless. I'm surprised you would actually resort to such a thing.

The person who is in so much pain that they cannot conceive of enduring one more day is surely praying for their death to come soon.

Or, much more likely, they are praying for the pain to end so they can get up, walk away and enjoy the rest of their lives. Will your all-powerful god answer that prayer?

For example an inspired Moses wrote 'Thou Shalt Not Kill' and we agree with the law. Moses' law also required that the adulteress be stoned to death which flies in the face of the law we agree with that says 'Thou Shalt Not Kill'.

Wouldn't Moses law have come directly from god? Is that not flawed? Is god therefore not flawed?

Jesus was demonstrating God's compassion and understanding and patience

So, what happened with god and Moses? Was there a breakdown in communications or did god lie to Moses?

To stone the adulteress was a complete no brainer for the people in Jesus' time.

Maybe for some, but there must have been people who thought stoning was not a no-brainer, and had never heard a word from Jesus. Or, maybe Jesus was merely the mythical embodiment of those peoples collective thoughts?