Euthanasia

[Woeler]

To continue the argument in the Christmas topic

[quote="TheLionPrince"][quote="Woeler"]
Alright, I see. I already hear the atheists and the secularists being blamed by many Americans.

People who do such things are not true atheists or antitheists or humanists or secularists. They're just idiots. On the other side of the extreme scale you have the religious screaming OMG I IZ BEING PERSECUTED RESPECT MY BELIEFS.

I find it ironic that The US has religiously (Yes very religious!) based laws which prevent people from legally ending their lives when they're terminal, and there is no huge discussion, but when a Christmas tree is removed, that's a big deal. Oh boy is that important... Priorities, anyone...?

Deny terminal cancer patients the right to die with some dignity -> should be tolerated
Make healthcare choices for women which are no government business -> should be tolerated
Deny Gay people the right to mary -> should be tolerated
Naming a Christmas tree a holiday tree -> OMFG SATAN
Removing a Christmas tree -> OMFG BLASPHEMY DISRESPECT HOW DARE YOU, HELL IS WAITING.

Spot the irony? I do.[/quote]

Okay, I see the "irony". Well, my problem with euthanasia is that 98% of American medical students swear on some form of the Hippocratic Oath. One of the oaths state it is their moral responsibilty for medical doctors to care "for the good of my patients" and "I will give no deadly medicine to any one if asked". Euthanasia contradicts this oath.[/quote]
Do you know how immoral this is? Honestly, letting someone suffer because you do some stupidass oath?
4 years ago there was a girl who lived in a town nearby mine. She had been fighting cancer for 5 years. 5 years of terrible pain, 5 years of being loaded full with poison. The only big decision she needed to make is whether to read a book or not to read one while the transparent sack of poison slowly emptied itself into her system.

18 years old, 5 years of terrible and painful struggle against a disease that can not be overthrown. At the age of 18 the doctors told her that it was too late. Nothing would work and she would die. For I have seen my uncle die because of cancer, it is one of the most painful deaths one could ever imagine.

This girl, she didn't want to die in agonizing pain. She wanted to die with some dignity. She wanted to die as a human. Her parents and the doctor promised her that when the pain became too much, they would end the story.

19 days after the deathsentence by nature she told her parents the following "mom, dad. This is not what you promised." They put her to sleep after a last goodbye and she died among family and friends.

How dare anyone deny a person who is suffering like that a humane death because they swore some stupidass oath.

And by not fulfilling her wish you are not only hurting her. No. Her family has to watch. Her parents have to watch their daughter die slowly and painfully while the pain gets stronger and more intense every single second.

Anyone, anyone who can look me in the face and tell me it is moral to deny people the right to die in a humane way is not human. That is a monster. We don't have such ridiculous oaths here (which are no reason and no argument. It is the law, not the oath). Here we have things called human rights, and a conscience.

Besides, what gives a person the right to tell another person whether he or she can or cannot die? Exactly. Nothing.

[TheLionPrince]

(Did you really need to create a new thread about this? You could have just revived the one you already stated.)

Concerning the topic, I'm so sorry to hear about the girl! Rest in peace! However, I doubt this will change my viewpoint.

Euthanasia is like all other forms of murders. It's intentional. Some methods of passive euthanasia are just cruel and inhumane; one such as the withdrawal of food and water needed to survive. Access to food and water is a human neccesity, and is declared a natural right. What gives a person the right to let a person dye from hunger and dehydration? Exactly, none. The same goes with the withholding of treatment.

About the oath, I'm sorry, but that's just how society works! Every elected president in the United States, all the cabinet secretaries, the judges on the Supreme Court, and several hundred lawmakers had to take an oath. There's even an oath to be taken for incoming immigrants to become U.S. citizens. Workers have to write their names in allegiance to their particular companies. To sum things up, I find the Hippocratic Oath fully justificable.

Above all, I am split on this issue. It all depends on what you consider moral and immoral. A person has the right to do whatever they want with their lives, but I do not feel assisted suicides are always the answer.

[DGFone]

The biggest problem with Euthanasia:

You can't say "Actually, I didn't want it" after it was performed on you.

[TheBlackCatCrossing]

^Plus, what if the person was not exactly in the right state of mind?

You cannot return it.

[Regulus]

[quote="TheLionPrince"]Some methods of passive euthanasia are just cruel and inhumane; one such as the withdrawal of food and water needed to survive.[/quote]

That isn't euthanasia. At least, that's not what the commonly accepted idea is.

[quote="DGFone"]The biggest problem with Euthanasia:

You can't say "Actually, I didn't want it" after it was performed on you.[/quote]

Implying that, if it were legalized, it would be legal for anything less than already life threatening, incurable conditions.

[quote="TheBlackCatCrossing"]^Plus, what if the person was not exactly in the right state of mind?

You cannot return it.[/quote]

If the consent of the person and their family is required, that would eliminate this problem.

The very definition speaks for itself:

Euthanasia: the painless killing of a patient suffering from an incurable and painful disease or in an irreversible coma.

It must be painless (not torture), and it must only be used as a last resort for a severe condition (and is therefore not murder).

[TheLionPrince]

[quote="Regulus"][quote="TheLionPrince"]Some methods of passive euthanasia are just cruel and inhumane; one such as the withdrawal of food and water needed to survive.[/quote]

That isn't euthanasia. At least, that's not what the commonly accepted idea is.[/quote]

Keep in mind, I said "some methods". I learned of that method from this website. If I am not mistaken, the most used euthanasia method is a lethal injection.

[DGFone]

Do be honest, I view euthanasia as a big red "I give up" button. One thing I am eyeing with interest to replace it is cryogenics. Sure, right now it's only affordable to the very rich, and we can't figure out how to thaw out the people already inside, but think about it: you have a what is now considered a deadly disease. You get frozen, and get thawed when humans figure out how to reverse cryo, as well as a cure for your problem is discovered. Plus, like all technology, crgyo is only available for the rich now, but with a healthy dose of investing and competition, I can see it getting cheap enough to get affordable by the middle class. (Adding laws preventing a failing cry company to pull the plug on its patients added of course)

In any right state of mind, no living creature, us humans included, want to die. It's the most basic of instinct. When people say "I am ready to die, so kill me now", their not exactly ready. But they see either no better option, or are so fed up with a broken body that they want to give up. To repeat: no one ever wants to die. But sometimes, death is the best option.

So my opinion is just let people get euthanasia if they (doctor and family approved) want, get the fuss over with, and start looking for ways not to require it in the first place.

[Woeler]

[quote="TheLionPrince"]

Euthanasia is like all other forms of murders. It's intentional. Some methods of passive euthanasia are just cruel and inhumane; one such as the withdrawal of food and water needed to survive. Access to food and water is a human neccesity, and is declared a natural right. What gives a person the right to let a person dye from hunger and dehydration? Exactly, none. The same goes with the withholding of treatment. [/quote]
that is complete bs. There only is one form of legal euthanasia in all of Europe and that is a lethal injection, which is the most painless and humane death one can have. There is no such thing as euthanasia by starvation or dehydration. Neither is withholding treatment. Euthanasia isn't forcing people to die. Euthanasia is giving people the right to end their own lives when the pain becomes too much.

What gives me the right to end someones life? Nothing.
What gives you the right to end someones life? Nothing.
What gives me the right to force someone to live? Nothing.
What gives you the right to force someone to live? Nothing.
What gives me the right to intervene in someone else's personal decisions? Nothing.
What gives you the right to intervene in someone else's personal decisions? Nothing.
What gives a suffering person the right to decide over his/her own death? Everything in the world.

It's not my choice, it's not your choice. It's THEIR choice and that must be respected. But nope, people must be forced to abide the laws of a group or religion they do not support or believe in.

Just because you think it's wrong doesn't mean that other shouldn't have the right to do it. Don't like it? don't do it. But don't deny others that right by allowing ridiculous laws to be passed which are in fact infringements on basic human rights. The right to live includes the right to die. Just because some people are afraid of death doesn't mean others are.

[quote="TheLionPrince"]
About the oath, I'm sorry, but that's just how society works! Every elected president in the United States, all the cabinet secretaries, the judges on the Supreme Court, and several hundred lawmakers had to take an oath. There's even an oath to be taken for incoming immigrants to become U.S. citizens. Workers have to write their names in allegiance to their particular companies. To sum things up, I find the Hippocratic Oath fully justificable. [/quote]
no, that's how society works for people who believe in such thing. "sorry mate, I swore an oath so you have to suffer"? I find this oath a complete disgrace to the one in the hospital bed. Oaths should be ceremonial, not executive.

[quote="TheLionPrince"]
Above all, I am split on this issue. It all depends on what you consider moral and immoral. A person has the right to do whatever they want with their lives, but I do not feel assisted suicides are always the answer.[/quote]
Good so that means neither you or a government has a say in whether a person can die or not. It is their own choice. Once again nobody has the right to decide over this besides the person himself. Not some wacko's making up a law because "they don't like it".

/reply
Start general post.

I am not saying this because I like euthanasia. I'm saying this because the right to die is a basic human right.

As Nietzsche wrote:
One has observed life poorly, if one has not also witnessed the hand that mercifully--kills

There are only two options here
Allow a terminal person the right to end their life and suffering
Or
Deny them that right because YOU (someone else) think it is immoral. (and thereby somehow get the right to decide another person's fate)?

I don't see what business other people have in this. It's easy to say such a thing when you're not the person in the hospital bed.

People who are against legalizing this take away rights they should have no say in.


I dare anyone who is against this and is willing to deny other people this right to watch the documentary below. It's a Dutch one, but it's subtitled in English. It's called ''one way ticket to heaven''. This will completely eliminate the bs ideas people have about what this is and how this works.
The woman is 36 years old and is suffering from terrible MS, she's catholic. One of her final words were ''If there really is a God, he would want us to be happy, and I'm finally going to be happy''.
And her Catholic pastor says ''You've fought enough, you've done enough, you've suffered enough. See you in heaven''.
And her sister ''We may not understand her decision. We can't understand her decision,we've not nearly suffered as much. It is not about understanding at all. It is about respecting someone's decision''.
And finally her husband, after her death (crying)''People sometimes confront me that Diana chose the easy way out to just end her life. Let's see what they would have done if they were standing in her shoes''.
IN FACT I would recommend everyone to take 25 minutes of their time and watch this beautiful and moving documentary.

[youtube]syVXCfgIAYg[/youtube]

It's not about understanding a decision. It's about respecting a decision.

And some more to actually make people understand how humane this really is.

[youtube]hssHdHGYlgM[/youtube]
[youtube]tD1_sGZz8yo[/youtube]

And one particularly directed at those who think they have the right to intervene with other people's lives.
[youtube]1j4c6aVFfUk[/youtube]

You know what's a similar situation? When Jesus was crucified people talked (and still do) about how terribly he must have suffered. Today's view: ''What a pusssy, he still has his eyes''.

This world isn't beautiful and loving, and sometimes, realizing that is the most educated and mature lesson one could ever learn.

[Azdgari]

If you want to have a productive conversation, you must be open to the other opinion of the other side. That way, the exchange of ideas go both ways and all of those talking can formulate new, deeper stances on issues. Why post if you're not looking to accept, not hear, but accept, the opinions that oppose your own?


That being said, Woeler, you seem to take the stance that those who oppose abortion oppose it because they think that it's immoral.But like DG showed, many oppose it for pragmatic reasons. Yes, people suffer terribly. However, try this angle and tell me what you think: The nonexistance of euthanasia saves lives. Suffering, terminal patients can turn around. It is rare, but does happen. Are you content to have these lost lives on your conscience? Those people will die because medicine was unable to predict their turnaround, and their lives will be (I believe) thrown away.



Yes, I do support and did vote in favor of euthanasia.

[Arani]

There are quite simple ways to bypass religion and such though. When my grandma was in the hospital and in a lot of pain, we decided that the best thing for her would to give her the least painful death we could. And we knew that the doctor she had was against such things and wouldn't allow it, so my grandpa asked for another doctor who was not religious, and my grandma was able to pass without pain. If people believe in it, then they do. If they don't, then they don't. It's not our job to say that their beliefs and religions about it are BS. Yes I agree that it's the in-pain person's/families choice, but if it's against another's religion you can't change that. Just go find someone who you can agree with instead of fighting the one you can't agree with. =/