The right to die?

[Sea of red]

I've worked in Hospice. Here's what happens. A person must have a terminal illness that is progressively becoming worse and is no longer treatable. A DNR must be signed, and the goal is to provide comfort measures such as pain relief, food and water on request, assistance with ADL's and as the person decides in their DNR they may reject forced nutrition and fluids but ask for pain medicines and nausea medicines to relieve discomfort even if it shortens the time they have left. Although generally once a person gets to a point where they can no longer eat or drink, death comes within 5-7 days. Medicines used at that point are used to clear excess secretions, severe pain, anxiety, and sponges to assist with dry mouth. At the point where it gets to specific medicines every hour a person may become comatose and a person may pass away. Is this assisted suicide? Not necessarily. A person who is clearly at death's door is receiving relief from symptoms of their disease which is killing them. Am I ok with that? yes. However am I ok with someone being given a fatal dose of morphine and potassium chloride at the beginning of a diagnosis? No. why? because we do not know where there illness will take them, how long there life will last, if they can be cured ( even a neuroglioblastoma has a 10 percent cure rate, could they be one of those 10 percent?) Life does not have a stamp on it. and having known 2 people that committed suicide that were mentally ill (and not in their right mind at the time) I firmly suggest that many who consider suicide are not in their rig mind. Even the Late Robin Williams was found to have Lewy's Dementia, which while fatal in 5-10 years indicates that at the time he was killing himself something was severely wrong. and having worked in this population we don't know but I can take an educated guess that hallucinations, paranoia, mood swings could have all been a part of it, an any number of medicines would have assisted him. It didn't have to end in suicide.

But why do you feel you have a right to draw the line FOR HIM? If you want to live on life support and go through all the symptoms, then that can be your choice. I wouldn't take that from you under any circumstance. But don't go and tell me what's 'too much' or 'not enough' for me. It's hypocritical fascism and it's none of your business.

It seems like conservative Christians are actually pretty big government - not that wasn't obvious before. It's just a different kind of big government. Here is something that couldn't divide us all more and instead of letting people make their own legal choices, you want the government to step and make them for us.

[Sea of red]

62, Sea. But it's just a number. And I really don't know why you're so fixated on me. Maybe it's a man crush, and I don't reciprocate.

I'm fixated on you? You're the motherless cockroach that keeps following me from thread to thread - you even made one for me. You always start the conversation, not me. And as for the man crush thing: in your dreams you old fart machine.

OTOH: If you're really 62, then that makes you about ten years more pathetic than I thought you were.

[Cow Poke]

I'm fixated on you? You're the motherless cockroach that keeps following me from thread to thread - you even made one for me. You always start the conversation, not me. And as for the man crush thing: in your dreams you old fart machine.

OTOH: If you're really 62, then that makes you about ten years more pathetic than I thought you were.

Bless your heart.

[Sea of red]

Bless your heart.

Alright, you bless my heart, and I'll bless your brain.

[Jedidiah]

What happens if the government gets wind of my intentions? What happens if somebody reports my plan? Take a guess.

Don't tell anyone, problem solved.

[Jedidiah]

That's why there's this concept of 'witnesses' Jedediah.

And false witness as well. Of course in court all witnesses are telling the truth.

[Teallaura]

It most certainly does.

Otherwise it wouldn't be done, now would it?

You seem to think only murder is illegal - it's not the case. There are legal and illegal forms of homicide - this is law 101. Abortion is NOT legal because it somehow isn't murder - it's legal because the child's rights were defined away.

Depraved indifference homicide and manslaughter are both not murder and both illegal. Justifiable homicide and execution are both homicide and legal.

You. do. not. know. what. you're. talking. about.

[Teallaura]

Take the abortion issue somewhere else, I'd like us all to drop it.

Weren't you the one that raised it?

[Teallaura]

I'm not going to bother arguing with you, Teal.

You're simply too far out there for me talk too. Our past debates were simply frustrating, time consuming, and an over all unpleasant experience for me. You are welcome to continue in the thread but I'm not interested in a debate with you on this. I've learned my lesson at this point.

Translation: I can't win so I'm taking my ball and going home.

[Teallaura]

That was overly harsh. I should have been a little more careful.

Teal, I don't find you as a person unpleasant, I just find our debates to be pretty unpleasant.

As I've gotten older, I don't beat around the bush like I used to with people. Now, I like to be concise and clear from the get-go, and not repeat myself over and over. My time isn't as free as it once was, so I have to pick my battles. That means I have to ignore certain posts that are not rewarding enough for me. Sometimes people accuse me of dodging but I'm really just trying to pick the best responses, so I don't have to repeat what I've already said.

I like you as a person from what I read about you, Teal. But sometimes you insinuate things or even insult me (not that bad though) in ways I don't let most users and if I fully engage you, I might get carried away with my words. I really don't want to do that to you. So please try to not get offended in my decision to not debate you on this kind of stuff.

I think this is well intentioned but it's both frustrating and infuriating. So I'll leave it alone for the moment. Obviously, I'd answered other posts before seeing this.

But the one I haven't answered, I will be answering a bit later.

[Sea of red]

I think this is well intentioned but it's both frustrating and infuriating. So I'll leave it alone for the moment. Obviously, I'd answered other posts before seeing this.

But the one I haven't answered, I will be answering a bit later.

Infuriating? It's simple a choice on my part not to engage you, try not to get so upset about it. There are plenty of other people to converse with.

[Teallaura]

Where 'right' is a legally protected ability, I agree. A lot of non-theists do hold that rights are intrinsic aspects of human nature that should be protected. That is, it's not a right because it's a protected, but rather it's protected because it's a right.

I do hold rights as legally protected abilities, so I mostly agree with you. However, I also recognize life and liberty (freedom to pursue one's own ends) as things all conscious creatures inherently seek regardless of society, so there's definitely room for intrinsic rights in the NT POV.

Yeah, I know it can be argued - which was while I said 'yet'. But he is a long way from getting the point established and I see no reason to grant it a priori .

Now, personally, I'm not convinced that it's a good argument from the NT POV - all conscious creatures also seek food which doesn't make stealing a kid's Happy Meal moral from either individual or societal stances. But yes, I do concede that it's a valid argument.

[Teallaura]

Infuriating? It's simple a choice on my part not to engage you, try not to get so upset about it. There are plenty of other people to converse with.

That's not the infuriating part. Doesn't help - but that wasn't what I found infuriating.

[Cow Poke]

Weren't you the one that raised it?

[Spartacus]

... does anyone want to talk about double-effect?