Euthanasia | A Religious View

[waitasec]

Euthanasia isn't just a discussion about terminal illnesses but about people who are in a certain condition and death is not imminent. With regard to terminal illnesses where death is imminent and sure, then I probably wouldn't puposefully pro-long it (unless of course he wanted to say bye to a relative).

if the quality of life isn't going to get better and the person sees no hope...why prolong the suffering to them and to those that love and care that person?
the only person who can make that call is the person going through it...

 

[Quiddity]

You know, I was just thinking it's amazing all these "rights" we have. We have the right to do all kinds of things to our own body. We can tattoo it, cut it, scar it, pierce it, even sell it for sex in certain places. We can get plastic surgery, liposuction, and boob jobs. We can do dangerous things like sky diving, bungee jumping, cliff jumping, hang gliding, and so on and so forth. We have the right to our own body enough that if anyone violates it through things like assault and rape they go to jail. However, for some reason, we don't seem to be given the right to do something to our own body that would cause our death. We have a right to life, but we don't have the right to end that life. Why is that? We come into this world without the choice of whether we live or not, why do we not at least have the choice of when and how we die? Granted, someone taking their own life may be considered tragic and sad to others, but all in all, did they not have the right to decide to die? Just food for thought.

A right to life?

A right to a life?

Because I don't remember choosing to live. Just sayin.

 

[waitasec]

A right to life?

A right to a life?

Because I don't remember choosing to live. Just sayin.

to each his own...
what's the big deal?


i honestly don't get it.

 

[McBell]

A right to life?

A right to a life?

Because I don't remember choosing to live. Just sayin.

Whose life do you have rights to?
Oh yeah.
Yours.
But not completely.

 

[Draka]

A right to life?

A right to a life?

Because I don't remember choosing to live. Just sayin.

I said we didn't choose to live, but then again, that doesn't seem to disqualify us from having a right to our life. In that, if someone else tries to take it, or succeeds in taking it, they have broken the law and go to prison. So our life is supposedly our own. Our body is our own, to mark or mar, to prostitute or endanger, but for some reason, not to kill. We go to someone else to help us mark our body. We go to someone else to help us adjust our body through surgery. We go to someone else to help us endanger our body and risk our life through daredevil acts. Why can we not seek help from another to kill ourselves? As long as it is our decision, why can we not make it?

 

[methylatedghosts]

By suffering you mean "physical pain"?

Yes. And though I can't think of any at this time, I'm sure there would be other kinds of suffering that lead to a significantly diminished quality of life.

 

[methylatedghosts]

I said we didn't choose to live, but then again, that doesn't seem to disqualify us from having a right to our life. In that, if someone else tries to take it, or succeeds in taking it, they have broken the law and go to prison. So our life is supposedly our own. Our body is our own, to mark or mar, to prostitute or endanger, but for some reason, not to kill. We go to someone else to help us mark our body. We go to someone else to help us adjust our body through surgery. We go to someone else to help us endanger our body and risk our life through daredevil acts. Why can we not seek help from another to kill ourselves? As long as it is our decision, why can we not make it?

The problem, of course, is that many people are so uncomfortable with the idea of death, with the idea of dying "before their time", they find it difficult to imagine situations where it can be an acceptable choice. Our culture has been told for such a very very long time that death is a bad thing, and that ending a life - your own or someone else's - is even worse than death itself. Most people avoid thinking about death as much as they can. What I find interesting, though, is the amount of people with terminal illness who say things like "I didn't really start living until I found out I was dying from such-and-such disease".

Of course, if it's found that someone has caused your death, regardless of whether you wanted to, you can't easily pop back and say "no, it's ok, I wanted him to do that."

If you do plan on killing someone, I suggest getting witnessed video, hard-copy paper evidence to say that you did it with their permission and only because they couldn't do it themselves.

 

[Quiddity]

I said we didn't choose to live, but then again, that doesn't seem to disqualify us from having a right to our life. In that, if someone else tries to take it, or succeeds in taking it, they have broken the law and go to prison. So our life is supposedly our own. Our body is our own, to mark or mar, to prostitute or endanger, but for some reason, not to kill. We go to someone else to help us mark our body. We go to someone else to help us adjust our body through surgery. We go to someone else to help us endanger our body and risk our life through daredevil acts. Why can we not seek help from another to kill ourselves? As long as it is our decision, why can we not make it?

The fact that we do [and can] this doesn't mean we should. As I see it, it is human nature to wish to preserve its own dignity and autonomy. This need not be religious argument either, men like Kant would have been horrified at the idea of assisted suicide. The human species has a natural inclination of self-preservation which orders them to preserve their own lives, so it is going against nature to seek one's own destruction.

I should have avoided using examples to begin with because if this is an issue of "rights" do you even need a good argument.......or an argument at all? It can be anything from pain to unhappiness, no?

 

[mr black]

The fact that we do [and can] this doesn't mean we should. As I see it, it is human nature to wish to preserve its own dignity and autonomy. This need not be religious argument either, men like Kant would have been horrified at the idea of assisted suicide. The human species has a natural inclination of self-preservation which orders them to preserve their own lives, so it is going against nature to seek one's own destruction.

I should have avoided using examples to begin with because if this is an issue of "rights" do you even need a good argument.......or an argument at all? It can be anything from pain to unhappiness, no?

Are you suggesting that no societies within the human framework have ever practiced assisted suicide, especially without whatever Abrahamic restrictions you ascribe?

 

[Draka]

The fact that we do [and can] this doesn't mean we should. As I see it, it is human nature to wish to preserve its own dignity and autonomy. This need not be religious argument either, men like Kant would have been horrified at the idea of assisted suicide. The human species has a natural inclination of self-preservation which orders them to preserve their own lives, so it is going against nature to seek one's own destruction.

I should have avoided using examples to begin with because if this is an issue of "rights" do you even need a good argument.......or an argument at all? It can be anything from pain to unhappiness, no?

First off, who is to decide what we "should" do for all of humanity? Secondly, what is it about dying a slow and painful death, with a body shutting down and becoming riddled with pain and the inability to care for oneself, or losing one's mind, retains any form of dignity? What is dignifying about loss of bodily functions and suffering? Would not being able to end one's life on one's own terms be an act of dignity? Isn't dignity determined within? As for going against nature, there have been many species and many cultures where choosing to go off and die at a particular time is considered normal and natural. What is unnatural is prolonging the life of a person who probably could have died peacefully quite a while ago rather than pumping them full of drugs and sustaining their life for them beyond what is reasonable.

 

[waitasec]

The human species has a natural inclination of self-preservation which orders them to preserve their own lives,
so it is going against nature to seek one's own destruction.

the use of medicine is going against nature too, as it disrupts what nature is dictating.


you can't have your cake and eat too.

 

[mr black]

The human species has a natural inclination of self-preservation

Yeah there ain't no other species who do that.......

 

[sandandfoam]

Originally Posted by stephenw
Pretend I've got Alzheimers. I am looking at indignity, confusion and a slow drawn out demise.
What right have you got to impose your morality upon me?

We do this as a society all the time. Whether it be via pragmatism or concensus we impose our values on others everyday.

However, in this case it's my refusal to let you die (assuming its not cancer or some other disease that is the cause of your death). In otherwords, you need assistance for basic needs like eating, going to the restroom, etc.

You still haven't answered my question.
I no longer expect you to.
I object strongly to anyone who would impose their morality upon me or any other just because they believe theirs to be superior. Or worse, because it's what everyone else is doing.

 

[Falvlun]

Euthanasia is a tricky business. It's a very difficult thing to put concrete rules down on, I can't imagine it not being done on a case-by-case basis. Blanket law just won't cut it. However, there are some things that I feel it should cover.
/snip/

So, I am not necessarily for euthanasia, but people should feel like they are more able to make the choice to allow the dying process to happen comfortably, with minimal suffering. I know I'd much rather have a few months of out-of-this-world-morphine-induced bliss, than a year of unending pain and discomfort, with the end result of death anyway.

So the outlines for this would be
The condition must be incurable, and get worse over time.
The person must have available to them grief and death counselling, as do their friends/family.
The person must be able to make clear their intentions and desires (i.e., of sound mind).
This must not be able to be overridden by the family once the person is unable to make the decision themselves, having made the decision previously (i.e. family telling doctors to go through with procedures anyway, when the person in question is no longer of sound mind).
EDIT (added): Every possible step must be taken to make the person as comfortable as possible, so as to minimise suffering (especially pain). Self-administered pain relief is one thing that comes to mind here.

I agree with most everything you said. There are ways to implement such rights and you covered many of the safeguards. I think the most important thing is that people should be thinking about these things, and communicate them to both their families and in writing.

There should be independent verification that the patient is of sound mind, by psychologists, or other qualified health care personnel. And, iirc, in Oregon, they implemented a waiting period. So you request it, talk with a psychologist for the initial evaluation, and then wait 3 months (or some period of time-- I don't recall what), and come back to make sure that you still want this.

For physician assisted suicide, at least, I think the patients' condition must be incurable, and progressively debilitating. Yes, this is an arbitrary line to draw, but I think it a reasonable one to make.