Welcome to the BDSM Library.
  • Login:
beymenslotgir.com kalebet34.net escort bodrum bodrum escort
Results 1 to 10 of 10

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Just a little OFF
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    2,821
    Post Thanks / Like
    I have no problem with euthanasia, per se, but there need to be a lot of checks and balances. For adults, of course, simple consent is all that should be needed. As thir stated, you own your own life. If you are unable to make an informed, rational decision due to illness or loss of mental capacity, your next of kin should be allowed to make that decision. A living will, naming the person able to make such decisions, should be everyone's priority. For the record, this was my mother's condition, her mind destroyed by Alzheimer's, her body failing all too slowly. My dad had the legal right to choose for her. And he did. And I supported him in it.

    For children, though, we have other problems. Yes, a child over the age of about 12 is probably capable of understanding what such a decision means, and should be able to make that decision with his parents; and doctors, consent. Younger children (and I don't claim to know just how young this should be) may not truly understand the implications, but for sure their parents should. And their doctors definitely should. So a parent, knowing that the doctors can do nothing more, and that their child is in pain with no hope in sight, should be allowed to make that choice.

    One thing I do know, however: they need to keep the fucking churches out of the loop! If the parents, or patient, are religious, then it is up to them whether or not to abide by the strictures of their church. If they are not religious, or reject those strictures, the churches should not be permitted to force them into not going forward. They can organize all the prayer vigils they like, since those will have no effect on reality anyway. And they can preach to their own people as much as they like, too. Those who rely on the authority of the church to make their decisions for them will likely follow suit. But the churches should not be allowed to make such decisions for the public at large.
    "A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything." - Friedrich Nietzsche

  2. #2
    {Leo9}
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,443
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Thorne View Post
    One thing I do know, however: they need to keep the fucking churches out of the loop! If the parents, or patient, are religious, then it is up to them whether or not to abide by the strictures of their church. If they are not religious, or reject those strictures, the churches should not be permitted to force them into not going forward. They can organize all the prayer vigils they like, since those will have no effect on reality anyway. And they can preach to their own people as much as they like, too. Those who rely on the authority of the church to make their decisions for them will likely follow suit. But the churches should not be allowed to make such decisions for the public at large.
    Here in UK they are very much the hurdle we cannot seem to get over - bishops are in the house of lords.

    I think it really really - (censured -) that one body of people should dictate to others how things should be!

    We had an example here in UK, where a woman with anorexia was so terribly ill that she wanted to stop trying to take nourishment. Now, in all the time she suffered from anorexia no one gave a damn, and she got no help. But when her body was finally so ruined that life was a hell for her, the courts decided that she should be force-fed. Journalists had it that the judge was afraid of the church. He did acknowledge that she was all there in her head, present and intelligent and completely knowledgeable about her situation - as indeed no one else can truly be. But he just didn't have the nerve.

    Another example is the English writer Terry Pratchett who has Alzheimer. He has argued a lot for the right to end it when you think the time is right, and to do it under legal circumstances with your friends around you and help for your family, in dignity. As of now, those who have money have to go to - is it Switzerland? and do it there, and then your family or spouse has a job ahead of him or her, what with transport of body and all that, and a very long lonely way home.

    It all comes down to who owns us, and if we have a democracy. As I see it, democracy means you have influence over yourself, as well as responsibility. But this isn't it, and it isn't civilized.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Members who have read this thread: 0

There are no members to list at the moment.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Back to top