Natural death? The patient is usually being sustained by unnatural means!
Scotland Assisted Suicide Legalization Bill Narrowed, Still Targets Disabled
- Thread starter Brian Foley
- Start date
Natural death? The patient is usually being sustained by unnatural means!
“ Originally Posted by StrangerInAStrangeLa
That is quite an unsupportable assumption.
I strongly suspect no sane person wants to live in agony. ”
BF ==== Pain killers, besides are they in any frame of mind to actually make that decision?
Stranger ======= THEY are the ONLY 1s in the frame of mind to make that decision for THEMSELVES. Not YOU.
“ Originally Posted by StrangerInAStrangeLa
I wonder too. We all should do our best to find out. Either way that may go, it doesn't mean people shouldn't have the choice. ”
BF === I believe in respect for life, I want no part of a society that allows mass abortion on demand, Euthanasia and assisted suicides programs, stem cell research and cloning.
Stranger ====== It does NOT MATTER what YOU believe. What matters is what each Individual believes & wants for herself.
Stick to 1 topic.
“ Originally Posted by spidergoat
We have a right to die humanely. Yes, there is a factor that a disabled person puts a burden on the community to pay for their expensive and ongoing care. We have to face the reality of that. ”
BF === Yeah, anything that might hurt their budgets. Their idea of cutting costs is by killing the “undesirables” that put a strain on their social programs.
Stranger ====== Strawman.
“ Originally Posted by Baron Max
Everyone dies, Brian, regardless of how many loving, compassionate people hang around them all the time. And what's the difference between dying on 2 Jun or 10 Jun? ...and it's even more telling if the person is doing nothing but lying on a bed in a nursing home. Is that 8 extra days so important to anyone? ”
BF === We were put here, born, we have to see it out to the end, whats 8 more days to wait for death by natural causes.
Stranger ====== Put here by WHO??? It's not up to YOU to say WHEN the end should be for ME.
That is quite an unsupportable assumption.
I strongly suspect no sane person wants to live in agony. ”
BF ==== Pain killers, besides are they in any frame of mind to actually make that decision?
Stranger ======= THEY are the ONLY 1s in the frame of mind to make that decision for THEMSELVES. Not YOU.
“ Originally Posted by StrangerInAStrangeLa
I wonder too. We all should do our best to find out. Either way that may go, it doesn't mean people shouldn't have the choice. ”
BF === I believe in respect for life, I want no part of a society that allows mass abortion on demand, Euthanasia and assisted suicides programs, stem cell research and cloning.
Stranger ====== It does NOT MATTER what YOU believe. What matters is what each Individual believes & wants for herself.
Stick to 1 topic.
“ Originally Posted by spidergoat
We have a right to die humanely. Yes, there is a factor that a disabled person puts a burden on the community to pay for their expensive and ongoing care. We have to face the reality of that. ”
BF === Yeah, anything that might hurt their budgets. Their idea of cutting costs is by killing the “undesirables” that put a strain on their social programs.
Stranger ====== Strawman.
“ Originally Posted by Baron Max
Everyone dies, Brian, regardless of how many loving, compassionate people hang around them all the time. And what's the difference between dying on 2 Jun or 10 Jun? ...and it's even more telling if the person is doing nothing but lying on a bed in a nursing home. Is that 8 extra days so important to anyone? ”
BF === We were put here, born, we have to see it out to the end, whats 8 more days to wait for death by natural causes.
Stranger ====== Put here by WHO??? It's not up to YOU to say WHEN the end should be for ME.
lol. that's so offensive for disabled people.
Its like essentially saying "oh, you are disabled... well since your life sucks we give you the right to legally kill yourself!"
I have two friends who attempted suicide, and they both are alive, well and happy. That is why I am against it and would be completely against anyone wanting to kill themselves.. There's always hope, and if there really isn't, you really got nothing to lose either way, so why not at least try.
Anyways, I wonder how much the suicide rates will change whether or not we legalize it... its not like people care about the law once they are dead.
Its like essentially saying "oh, you are disabled... well since your life sucks we give you the right to legally kill yourself!"
I have two friends who attempted suicide, and they both are alive, well and happy. That is why I am against it and would be completely against anyone wanting to kill themselves.. There's always hope, and if there really isn't, you really got nothing to lose either way, so why not at least try.
Anyways, I wonder how much the suicide rates will change whether or not we legalize it... its not like people care about the law once they are dead.
Well, what a nice thought ......but do you think it's YOUR place to decide what others do with their own lives and deaths?
The issue in this thread is far more about personal freedom to chose than it is about personal thoughts on what people SHOULD do, or what you would like them to do.
Should we all, individually, have some voice in what others want to do? And if so, how much of a voice? If someone wants to die, should we all stand up and demand that he continue to live?? ...giving him no freedom of choice whatsoever? That don't sound very nice, does it?
How would you like a bunch of strangers telling you what to do, and forcing you to do it? Don't sound too nice when the shoe is on the other foot, does it? Or do you like being told what to do?
Baron Max
On life sustaining medication which usually results in a healing of the symptoms.
I am not concerned with what you think, anyone told they will be dying of an untreatable disease would not be of any rational state of mind after hearing that to make any decision.
I know that’s what made me post the article, the whole idea is cold blooded, you’re a cost to the community, we know you don’t like being disabled, we don’t like spending the money so please kill yourself.
This suicide option is just that, giving up, and once we allow this assisted suicide to become common practice, we end up with a loosening of the rules, and eventually an imposed Euthanasia programme.
i know what bill it is, its the one i criticted
Oh please cut it out with the freedoms and liberties crap, were talking about people killing themselves...
Its not like the legality of it will keep someone from doing it. In most situations if someone wants to do it they can regardless of the law.
They obviously weren't terminally ill, were they.
Oregon's assisted suicide law did not effect its suicide rate.
I was speaking about suicide in general.
I mean, if someone has 2 months to live where its going to be nothing but pain and suffering only to end up dead... then ya, sure, I am all for letting them go.
there is no evidence from the nethelands that it does anything. your talking about 2 different things, someone chosing to die (or refuse treatment for that matter) because you have a painful or degrading TERMINAL illness. you might as well say that refusal of treatment incfeases the numbers of people who die from resp failure. technically yes but if you compare people who DONT have a terminal illness you still find that people demand treatment at the same levels as pre pt autonomy
“ Originally Posted by StrangerInAStrangeLa
Stranger ====== Put here by WHO??? It's not up to YOU to say WHEN the end should be for ME. ”
Then you'd refuse them making any medical & legal decisions, take over their finances, take away their children & not let them drive?
Humans are rarely in a rational state of mind.
There will never be any situation which puts you in a better position than me to make such decisions concerning me.
You're only concerned with what you think & forcing me to live & die by it.
Stranger ====== Put here by WHO??? It's not up to YOU to say WHEN the end should be for ME. ”
Then you'd refuse them making any medical & legal decisions, take over their finances, take away their children & not let them drive?
Humans are rarely in a rational state of mind.
There will never be any situation which puts you in a better position than me to make such decisions concerning me.
You're only concerned with what you think & forcing me to live & die by it.
If we allow automobiles, can you guarantee there won't be thousands of deaths per year from it?
It does not matter what psychiatrists say.
Put here by WHO???
Last edited by a moderator:
his argument is plain stupidity, even now we respect a pts RIGHT to refuse any and all treatment they want even if it causes there death. we have JW in trauma cases who refuse to accept blood transfusions when we can garentiee they will live long heathy lives with high quality of life.
actually, to go against a pts desires carries criminal charges for assult and false inprisionment.
yet we dont hear brian complaining about that.
i dont belive there is a difference between passive euthanasia (with holding treatment) and active euthanasia
actually, to go against a pts desires carries criminal charges for assult and false inprisionment.
yet we dont hear brian complaining about that.
i dont belive there is a difference between passive euthanasia (with holding treatment) and active euthanasia
The most coldblooded thing in all this is the desire & attempt to make others conform to & live & die by what you want.
Eugenics isn't picky, you might believe that it was just used on the old and infirm, however you neglect to question who makes the decision about who the old and infirm are. There are many healthy people that have been abused by Eugenics because of their Political, Religious or just Moral aversion to it's use. They didn't have illnesses, they weren't a burden on society, they were just silence for being opposed to such cruel demeaning torture methods.
You know it's possible to generate pain through radiology that would mirror that of a fatal disease, all it would require is a few doctors to falsify information to the patient for them to believe it was a real illness and it would be possible to use such suicide bills to mass control the populous of anyone that doesn't fit into the authoritarian society that adopts that method of control.
oh god stryder, you have to be kidding. you have ANY idea how much paperwork these bills demand? how many people would have to be involved? 4 doctors, 2 independent witnesses, repesentives of the VEC, the council of churches, the palitive care association, the AMA, and others (8 in total but cant rember the rest look it up, brian posted the bill), the registra, the minister, the whole of parliment and last but not least, the coronor
It's odd, isn't it, that back in the old days, people normally died at some 55-60 years old and it didn't cause any major trauma to society as a whole. So, ...what's the big deal if people had continued to die at 55-60? Society would still be going strong ...perhaps strong.
Baron Max
Baron Max
Could you answer these questions:
Can you guarantee society that this process will not be expanded in the future to include persons with mental retardation or senility who cannot make that decision?
Can you guarantee that this decision will not be left to the next of kin to decide?
Can you guarantee that the bar will not be dropped to allow assisted suicide simply by patient consent?
If you want to commit suicide by all means go ahead blow your brains out in your own home. My only concern is we dont have legislation adopted that leads eventually to wholesale euthanasia.