Euthanasia is a very tricky subject. I agree with it in certain instances, but I think it is something which could very easily be abused. That's where the whole trouble lies. One of my uncles was in a coma for about a year - after a motorbike accident - before he died. My mother was sure she would ocasionally see some sort of recognition, which would imply an ability to recover, but ultimately he never did. I can totally understand the wishes of someone who is terminally ill and in a lot of pain, but I think it is much harder to judge the case of someone who is in a coma/vegetative state. Almost perversely, I supported what happened in the Terri Schiavo case. It seemed correct.
I guess bottom line for me is, why go on like a burden? And not only a burden, but a burden that responds like a vegitable? Burdens are one thing, we all have them. Be it an overly protective mother that kept you from being able to go to the bathroom anywhere but at home, or a father that raised you to believe that family is the number one obligation, a persistant vegitative state is not good. And, especially for those who ascribe religion to the situation, when the body is done for, why make the mind suffer away from god? If the person lives on, then aren't you doing the best thing for the soul?
AC writes: You, nor anyone else, has the right to make an official call on whether someone is worthy of living or not.
This could bring us straight back to the abortion debate. You think I'm hypocritical? Look at your own comments? The death penalty isn't neccesary but abortion is? 90% of the time abortion is NOT neccesary. Neccesary should mean life or death, not convienence.
AC writes: Evil is legalising murder by electrocution. That's evil. How barbaric do you wanna get?
Barbaric is stabbing an unborn baby in the head and sucking it's brains out. Don't forget that death row inmates have the option of the chair or injection, and they always opt for injection because they're afraid of the pain of being zapped.
Anyway. With the Teri Shivio case, I don't think the case should ever have gotten that far. Michael was Teri's next of kin, so he should have had the right to pull the plug. Teri was never going to get better, her parents, IMO, were a bunch of religious freaks who were too selfish to look past their own beliefs and consider for just a second what their daughter may have wanted.
AC, I know whats it's like having a grandparent like that. Although I don't know yet, my great aunt has Alziemers, and will lose the ability to eat, go to the bathroom, feed herself etc. I feel so bad knowing that will happen to her, and she knows it too, it must be so scary for her. My aunt isn't the type to want to end her life, but I often wonder if she'll change her mind down the track. I really don't want to see her suffer.
It's hard to know what the person would want if they can't soeak for themselves, that's why everyone should make a living will as soon as they can, and tell your family of your wishes.
Originally posted by Makedde
This could bring us straight back to the abortion debate. You think I'm hypocritical?
No, I've/you've proven you are. There's no "think" about it. Go on, though...
Originally posted by Makedde
Look at your own comments? The death penalty isn't neccesary but abortion is? 90% of the time abortion is NOT neccesary. Neccesary should mean life or death, not convienence.
You view me as a pro-abortion though, that's not what I am. I'm pro-whatever the hell she wants to do with her own body and her own creation. I don't agree with certain abortions, but then again, I don't agree with a lot of things that are none of my business. So I do what anyone should do and keep my nose out.
The death penalty isn't necessary in any case, it's just around because the governments (and people) think the prisons are too far gone to have any complete reform and use the death penalty as a sweep-it-under-the-rug solution. There are abortions that are necessary, even you admit. So that puts your case right out of the window. Moreover, this is euthanasia, not abortion.
Originally posted by Makedde
AC writes: Evil is legalising murder by electrocution. That's evil. How barbaric do you wanna get?Barbaric is stabbing an unborn baby in the head and sucking it's brains out. Don't forget that death row inmates have the option of the chair or injection, and they always opt for injection because they're afraid of the pain of being zapped.
You miss the point, as per usual.
Don't lecture someone on why they're dangerous and barbaric, then kill them in a way that is devised to be barbaric. It doesn't make you look good, it makes you looks as bad and hypocritical.
-AC
You said electrocution was barbaric, I say stabbing a baby's head and sucking it's brains out is also barbaric. You think it isn't?
I don't agree with certain abortions, but then again, I don't agree with a lot of things that are none of my business.
The death penalty is none of your business, so why so against it?
Originally posted by MakeddeThe Death Penalty is our business though....it could be you or AC or me that gets killed by it...and it is a REAL Human that gets killed....that being said, I don't care for the Death Penalty, kill them if you feel like it....
You said electrocution was barbaric, I say stabbing a baby's head and sucking it's brains out is also barbaric. You think it isn't?[b]I don't agree with certain abortions, but then again, I don't agree with a lot of things that are none of my business.
The death penalty is none of your business, so why so against it? [/B]
Capt> Define "burden".
I am in favour of euthanasia... if I could be absolutely certain that those who chose it, did it completely freely and willingly. I guess it depends on what country you live and who has to pay, say, hospital-bills.
I've made an arrangement with my family, that in the case I get in an accident and goes in coma, with no chance of recovering as more than a vegetable, they should pull the plug. This has nothing to do with me thinking I'd be a burden as hospitals are free in Denmark. It has to do with ME not wanting to live like that.
Or if I, at an old age, become ill and in terrible pain, I may want it to be over with.
But in countries where there's a hospital-bill to pay this becomes trickier, I think. If old grandpa Jones' family has to pay for his hospital-bill, would they eventually try to convince him to euthanasia??
And what about the doctors? Euthanasia is assisted suicide... Suicide is illegal (yes, ironic in a way, if I were to try and take my own life and fail, I'd be prosecuted). And where, then, do we draw the line? Would it only be doctors who could perform euthanasia? Would it be ethical of them?
Makkede> "The death penalty is none of your business, so why so against it?"
We're talking about someones sister/brother, mother/father, daughter/son or friend. Not to mention the fact that it's become obvious a lot of those killed by the state were in fact innocent of the crime of which they were being punished...
And even if you're 100 % certain someone committed murder, why then use the crime he's being sentenced for as punishment? Is it ok for the state to murder?
It is a natural course that should be chosen since it is your own life affected only. But this goes partly into philosphy and religion. The fact is, we (humanity in general) has developed too far and overstretched the boundaries of the natural world. If we had never developed such an unshakeable healthcare system, anyone in the medical state that this pertains to would have already been dead. Its natural that since we have so much stuff to make us live longer and all, we need something to cancel it out to a small extent. The decision should be made by the person who is affected and no others though, unless condition is beyond help. Life support is torture and something we shouldnt need.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Technically the state wouldn't be murdering, as the death penalty isn't unlawful.That just adds to the hypocricy however. "You murdered, you killed, so we're going to do the same."
-AC
Well, it's not the Government that is killing the person, a society decides to have the Death Penalty for certain crimes, and if you choose to go against the will of society (which is undoubtedly quite a powerful "person"😉 you will be punished accordingly, tough shit, don't kill someone the Society is protecting.
If someone should feel the need to answer, just quote me in the Death Penalty thread (I think we have one) I will respond if someone wishes me to.
Originally posted by The Black Ghost
unshakeable healthcare system
It would actually be more appropriate to call it an unshakeable sickcare system.
There are several types of euthanasia anyway. Its part of the Hippocritic Oath..................Hippocratic Oath that also gets in the way for practicing medicine and the law regarding medicine. However that doesn't cover all aspects of euthanasia.
When its all said and done we are a society afraid of death.................from beggining to end. One man's fears dictate another man's laws 😱
Go eithanasia, big time go living will ..................that was a good catch there Debbiejo.
Originally posted by Arachnoidfreak
And if you have a feeding tube down your throat and attached to a life support machine?
I'm guessing it a paralysed person; like Terry Schiavo's case. Personally I think, if the patient doesn't have the mental capacity to be in a consciences state, yet has the physical ability to remain alive with the tubes that have been provided, then allowance should be made to live. After all, that person cannot decide for them-self and no-one should be in their stead to decide.
Some decades ago, it wouldnt have been possible to retain life in these cases. There was not today's means to support them to live. Today we do. Even if keeping them alive might mean that they may never be able to move, medicine may profit off these cases to help understand how to better treatments for future patients.
Perhaps one day, the consequences of the 'hiccup' that led them to that state may be reversed.
Originally posted by The Omega
Capt> Define "burden".I am in favour of euthanasia... if I could be absolutely certain that those who chose it, did it completely freely and willingly. I guess it depends on what country you live and who has to pay, say, hospital-bills.
That sounded like you are putting a price tag on those patients.