The Right To Die?

[Señor Puntos]

Now, I didn't know where to put this seeing as there's no Debates forum, but this seems to be the best place to put it. Mods, please move it to somewhere more appropriate if you think it needs to be. And to all people of religion: please keep God(s) out of this debate and say why think it is wrong/right using your own opinions; we don't all believe in God(s) and you won't be able to debate very well with atheists if you're only argument is that your God(s) says it is wrong.


Recently a debate has come up as to whether people who have less than 6 months to live should be able to say when they want to die and how. I really don't know where I stand on this so I'll just put up a list of what I think are the Pros and Cons.

Pros:
They get to die with dignity.
Their family and friends get a chance to say goodbye.
They get to die in controlled circumstances.
They have the right to do what they want with their bodies.
I'll add to this list when I come up with more ideas.

Cons:
It's undermining disabled people's value of life.
They could be pressured into doing it.
There might be a miracle and the person doesn't die, but if they killed themselves they wouldn't know.
I'll add to this list when I come up with more ideas.

Please feel free to debate and discuss, and when someone comes up with a new idea I'll put it under the Pros or Cons section so we can all see the basic ideas without having to read through pages and pages of stuff.

[PrinceOfTheWest]

Seeking some clarification here, Señor. When you say:

Recently a debate has come up as to whether people who have less than 6 months to live should be able to say when they want to die and how.I presume that you wish to discuss more than simple suicide. Strictly speaking, everyone of reasonable physical capability is able to say when and how they die, because nearly everyone could at any time commit suicide. The question suggests that the discussion is more about the involvement of a secondary party; specifically, some other person to assist the person "wishing" to die with going about the deed. (In many venues the involvement of a secondary party to assist with a suicide is illegal.)

Furthermore, when you speak of people being able to "say when they want to die and how", it sounds like you're thinking of more than simply surroundings. If I'm in the hospital when the test results come back and the doctor says to me, "Mr. Thomas, you're in your final decline – you have less than a week", and I say, "Let me go home – I want to die in my own bed surrounded by my family", then there is no moral objection to that. Hence I presume the question at hand is whether specific action should be taken to insure death (what is called active euthanasia)? This seems implicit in your using the term when in your statement, since few know for certain exactly when death will happen unless they take specific action to insure it.

To summarize: are you asking for a discussion of whether secondary parties should be permitted to introduce active measures at the request of a person to insure that the person dies at a particular time in a particular manner?

[Lawrence]

Asking folks to debate life and death issues without recourse to their own faith positions is a bit odd if you ask me. Clearly, as the question is posed, you are assuming the value of human reason and the ability for individuals to make up their own minds. You are tacitly positing that human life has value, a position which is in my opinion one only arrived at by a belief in something which transcends simple existence, i.e. a faith position.

Even something as non-theological as the position "Life is intrinsically good and should not be foreshortened" is based on reasoning that has been influenced by thoughts of the divine.

This is my rather long way of saying that I can't even begin to answer this question without interjecting "God talk".

Pax,
L

[inkspot]

Here is a bump for this thread, for some discussion which cropped up over in the abortion thread.

The scenario: in Holland, euthanasia of the terminally ill is legal, but it is becoming clear that now in Holland old people and sick people are expected to request euthanasia to free up more resources for the living and not be a burden to their families. And now there are reports that doctors choose euthanasia for their critically ill patients without their consent -- to the point that now old people are afraid to go to the hosptial, in case someone there murders them!

LifeMaiden stated she would want euthanasia if she ever received the diagnosis of terminal cancer, but I would urge her to reconsider if she ever faces the situation, for these reasons:

* Suicide is the death of hope, and the ultimate rejection of God, beause you are saying to Him, "You don't know enough to give me the kind of life and/or death I want, so I will take control from you and kill myself rather than wait for what you have planned for me."

* Suicide is your decision that God cannot sustain you, and your rejection of the hope of healing. My sis-in-law was slowly becoming disabled for two years, and her dr had told her the onlly hope for her recovery was a heart transplant -- but if you know about it, you know you must wait on a llist for one and maybe you don't even get one after a long time of waiting, and when you have it, you're on anti-rejection drugs the rest of your life ... For two years, this was her life of uncertainty and ever-increasing disability. Then last fall, God miraculously healed her heart, and today she is as healthy and active as ever! What if she had decided the dr's diagnosis was the ultimate truth and just asked for euthanasia? god would have had no chance to show Himself strong for her.

* Your death with honor in the face of a terrible disease will be far more of a powerful witness to your faith in God than your abandoning hope in Him and choosing suicide. What will your parents, or children, think about your faith in God if it becomes useless to you in the face of pain and disability? It is in those moments when you most need Him that God becomes most real to you ... but if you choose euthanasia, you will be telling the world that you could trust God with everything except this one thing, your passage to the next world.

No matter how you are hurting, God is there, and He can sustain you. Killing yourself instead of trusting Him is always a mistake.

And as for whether society should have the power to kill you just for being old or sick, that is nonsense. The abuses in the Netherlands are clear proof of that. I have much more to say, but my post is arleady too long!

:)

[EveningStar]

I moved this to THE SOCRATIC CLUB because it is not a Christianity issue if religion is entirely screened out. Non-religious philosophical debate belongs there, without prejudice or judgment to its rightness or wrongness.

To misquote Decartes, "I Move, therefore I can."

[Aravis Kenobi]

No one has the right to die. No man is given the right to take another man or person's life. No baby (unborn or otherwise) deserves to die. All human life is sacred. Does it matter if someone says, "I believe all life is God-given, therefore, it's wrong to say you have the right to die?" Seems like religion should play a small part in this only if those participating swear not to debate it.

[Neevil]

Now, I didn't know where to put this seeing as there's no Debates forum, but this seems to be the best place to put it. Mods, please move it to somewhere more appropriate if you think it needs to be. And to all people of religion: please keep God(s) out of this debate and say why think it is wrong/right using your own opinions; we don't all believe in God(s) and you won't be able to debate very well with atheists if you're only argument is that your God(s) says it is wrong.


Recently a debate has come up as to whether people who have less than 6 months to live should be able to say when they want to die and how. I really don't know where I stand on this so I'll just put up a list of what I think are the Pros and Cons.

Pros:
They get to die with dignity.
Their family and friends get a chance to say goodbye.
They get to die in controlled circumstances.
They have the right to do what they want with their bodies.
I'll add to this list when I come up with more ideas.

Cons:
It's undermining disabled people's value of life.
They could be pressured into doing it.
There might be a miracle and the person doesn't die, but if they killed themselves they wouldn't know.
I'll add to this list when I come up with more ideas.

Please feel free to debate and discuss, and when someone comes up with a new idea I'll put it under the Pros or Cons section so we can all see the basic ideas without having to read through pages and pages of stuff.
First of all, if God is kept out of the discussion, then it is not possible to discuss it at all. If there is no Supreme Judge and higher authority, then what is right and wrong is determined by goverment. Therefore, if the goverment says euthanasia is legal, then it is morally right. So, if we keep God out, then there is really nothing to discuss, because we will accept whatever the goverment decides. I assume, Senor Puntos, that you did not really mean what you were saying, so I will take the liberty of bringing God back into the discussion.

If this thread is to decide whether euthanasia is morally right or wrong, then the list of Pro's and Con's don't really pertain to the discussion. Whether something benefits us or not, or makes us feel good, does not determine if it's right or wrong. If I steal money from someone, I can buy lots of nice stuff that will make me feel good. But stealing is still wrong. So feelings/personal benefits do not reall belong in this discussion, if you are trying to decide whether euthanasia is right or wrong.

I recently read a book about the Declaration of Independence, and it was talking about the phrase "unalienable rights." One of these rights is the right to life. We have a right to live our lives for God. We can defend ourselves against others, but we cannot harm ourselves, commit suicide, or waste our lives. I never thought about it this way before.

If someone is told they only have 6 months to live, and they decide to end their life right then and there, they will be violating their duty to live their life for God. Not only will they be commiting suicide, and harming themselves, but they will also be wasting some of their life! They still have 6 months that they can live their life for God. If they end their life right then and there, they waste 6 months of time that could be used for a multitude of things that would bring glory the their Creator. Also, like Inkspot said, they could be healed, and have the rest of their life to live. In that case, they would have wasted even more of the precious time God had given them. Euthanasia is wrong because it is suicidal, harmful, and it is wasteful.

[Copperfox]

Too many people today are trying to parlay a "right" to die into a DUTY to die--which then leads to a "right" for doctors to kill the "defective."

[The First Joke]

Now, I didn't know where to put this seeing as there's no Debates forum, but this seems to be the best place to put it. Mods, please move it to somewhere more appropriate if you think it needs to be. And to all people of religion: please keep God(s) out of this debate and say why think it is wrong/right using your own opinions; we don't all believe in God(s) and you won't be able to debate very well with atheists if you're only argument is that your God(s) says it is wrong.


Recently a debate has come up as to whether people who have less than 6 months to live should be able to say when they want to die and how. I really don't know where I stand on this so I'll just put up a list of what I think are the Pros and Cons.

Pros:
They get to die with dignity.
Their family and friends get a chance to say goodbye.
They get to die in controlled circumstances.
They have the right to do what they want with their bodies.
I'll add to this list when I come up with more ideas.

Cons:
It's undermining disabled people's value of life.
They could be pressured into doing it.
There might be a miracle and the person doesn't die, but if they killed themselves they wouldn't know.
I'll add to this list when I come up with more ideas.

Please feel free to debate and discuss, and when someone comes up with a new idea I'll put it under the Pros or Cons section so we can all see the basic ideas without having to read through pages and pages of stuff.

it's hard to separate my religious beliefs, but just plain morally, i think that everyone should live from conception to natural death. my aunt is dying right now of cancer and she's living. i mean how can you go through with suicide, basically? i just don't think euthanasia is the right was to die.

[Aravis Kenobi]

Well, suicide is basically murdering yourself, and murder is a sin.

[Aravis Kenobi]

First of all, if God is kept out of the discussion, then it is not possible to discuss it at all. If there is no Supreme Judge and higher authority, then what is right and wrong is determined by goverment. Therefore, if the goverment says euthanasia is legal, then it is morally right. So, if we keep God out, then there is really nothing to discuss, because we will accept whatever the goverment decides. I assume, Senor Puntos, that you did not really mean what you were saying, so I will take the liberty of bringing God back into the discussion.

If this thread is to decide whether euthanasia is morally right or wrong, then the list of Pro's and Con's don't really pertain to the discussion. Whether something benefits us or not, or makes us feel good, does not determine if it's right or wrong. If I steal money from someone, I can buy lots of nice stuff that will make me feel good. But stealing is still wrong. So feelings/personal benefits do not reall belong in this discussion, if you are trying to decide whether euthanasia is right or wrong.

I recently read a book about the Declaration of Independence, and it was talking about the phrase "unalienable rights." One of these rights is the right to life. We have a right to live our lives for God. We can defend ourselves against others, but we cannot harm ourselves, commit suicide, or waste our lives. I never thought about it this way before.

If someone is told they only have 6 months to live, and they decide to end their life right then and there, they will be violating their duty to live their life for God. Not only will they be commiting suicide, and harming themselves, but they will also be wasting some of their life! They still have 6 months that they can live their life for God. If they end their life right then and there, they waste 6 months of time that could be used for a multitude of things that would bring glory the their Creator. Also, like Inkspot said, they could be healed, and have the rest of their life to live. In that case, they would have wasted even more of the precious time God had given them. Euthanasia is wrong because it is suicidal, harmful, and it is wasteful.

Wow! I so agree with Gale on this.

[The First Joke]

but we have to keep religion out. to convince those who don't believe in God. But i see your point

[Aravis Kenobi]

Like Gale (~Neevil~) said, there could be no discussion without some element of religion. I'm going to state it anyway, regardless of the fact that not all believe in a god.

[LifeMaiden]

No one has the right to die. No man is given the right to take another man or person's life. No baby (unborn or otherwise) deserves to die. All human life is sacred. Does it matter if someone says, "I believe all life is God-given, therefore, it's wrong to say you have the right to die?" Seems like religion should play a small part in this only if those participating swear not to debate it.



Some of what you say is purely ridiculous. I don't have the right to end my own life if I'm in pain and suffering and don't want to deal with it? I'm sorry, people, but regardless of what the Bible says about suicide, I'm not so arrogant to believe that MY life is worth saving if I'm in severe pain, or if I see someone suffering so badly like my parents, for example, who have stipulated clearly in their will that I am NOT to prolong their life. Does this mean I'm not valuing their life as sacred? Bull. I'm valuing their life as how they would want it to be lived...and that doesn't mean lying in a bed in a coma or vegetative state in pain.

I'm 'wasting' my life because I don't want to end up suffering with great pain? You can call me a coward, but saying than euthanasia is a 'waste' is a matter of opinion. It is NOT a matter of fact. You can argue that from a purely non religious point of view. And nothing anyone here can say to change the fact that yes, if I commit suicide because I don't want to DEAL with facing rounds and rounds of chemotherapy, or because I feel the dire need to end my life somehow, that I'm going to go to hell. So be it. I'm ready to face that judgement.


Sometimes, people think that just because you're 'living' that's supposed to be sacred. Yet prolonging someone on LIFE support is NOT God's doing...it's the human doing of machines and feeding tubes. And I will NOT allow my parents to suffer needlessly as they themselves have stated...to piss in a diaper, to be unable to feed themselves, or to live life WITHOUT dignity.

You people often amaze me. If you saw your parents or a beloved one suffering in pain, like on a battlefield where they were so severely wounded and disfigured that they begged you to end their life, would you sit there and say, " Sorry baby but your life is sacred and I won't end it even if it means you're gonna end up in a bad way anyways."

PLEASE! Spare me this argument about 'life is sacred' and it's NOT an act of heroism to end a life in extreme pain and suffering.

At what point is human life so sacred that it means a life of pain and suffering and endless torment?

[Aravis Kenobi]

Some of what you say is purely ridiculous. I don't have the right to end my own life if I'm in pain and suffering and don't want to deal with it? I'm sorry, people, but regardless of what the Bible says about suicide, I'm not so arrogant to believe that MY life is worth saving if I'm in severe pain, or if I see someone suffering so badly like my parents, for example, who have stipulated clearly in their will that I am NOT to prolong their life. Does this mean I'm not valuing their life as sacred? Bull. I'm valuing their life as how they would want it to be lived...and that doesn't mean lying in a bed in a coma or vegetative state in pain.

At what point is human life so sacred that it means a life of pain and suffering and endless torment?


IF you've stipulated that that's how you want it, then fine. I would still hold out for the hope that I could survive if God willed it. In my health book, it said to consult God. Consult the Highest Authority. Your decision should be based on that alone. That woman who was in that coma or whatever. (Terry something; I can't remember her name) would have been perfectly capable of living if she wasn't taken off the life-support. But her idiotic husband pulled the plug on her life, when she could have lived longer. I think the doctors reported that she wasn't in a vegetative state, so there was no need for them to pull the life-support. I consider that murder since her parents nor her wanted that.

[LifeMaiden]

IF you've stipulated that that's how you want it, then fine. I would still hold out for the hope that I could survive if God willed it. In my health book, it said to consult God. Consult the Highest Authority. Your decision should be based on that alone. That woman who was in that coma or whatever. (Terry something; I can't remember her name) would have been perfectly capable of living if she wasn't taken off the life-support. But her idiotic husband pulled the plug on her life, when she could have lived longer. I think the doctors reported that she wasn't in a vegetative state, so there was no need for them to pull the life-support. I consider that murder since her parents nor her wanted that.



Well my health book is clearly not yours, Aravis. Why is it that no one ASKED Terry Schiavo what SHE wanted? Why did not she have it stipulated in a will JUST IN CASE? People should be prepared at all times because you never know what happens. Wasn't it you who prayed that your grandfather or whatever wouldn't 'suffer' too much or too long when he had a heart attack or a stroke or whatever? At what given point would you allow YOUR loved ones to suffer needlessly and in great pain, should they BEG you to end their life, you would allow ' God' to keep them alive on the 'machines' of life support, which HAVE nothing to do with God, and let them suffer? That's inhumane, callous, and despicable to allow loved ones to suffer. If I was Terry Schiavo, I wouldn't want to live the way she did...and maybe if someone had asked HER what she wanted, that whole case wouldn't have been bought to the courts.




I already stated that life to me IS NOT worth living if I'm so out of it, physically incapable, and mentally incapable that I cannot live my life the way I WANT TO... and I don't care if anyone here calls me a coward because I want to live a life of DIGNITY and GRACE. If it means that I'm not a 'true' Christian because of that, then I guess I'm not, and I'm willing to face my own judgement if I decide that the day I can't run a mile or live my life the way I want to, is the day I die, then so be it.

[Aravis Kenobi]

Well my health book is clearly not yours, Aravis. Why is it that no one ASKED Terry Schiavo what SHE wanted? Why did not she have it stipulated in a will JUST IN CASE? People should be prepared at all times because you never know what happens. Wasn't it you who prayed that your grandfather or whatever wouldn't 'suffer' too much or too long when he had a heart attack or a stroke or whatever? At what given point would you allow YOUR loved ones to suffer needlessly and in great pain, should they BEG you to end their life, you would allow ' God' to keep them alive on the 'machines' of life support, which HAVE nothing to do with God, and let them suffer? That's inhumane, callous, and despicable to allow loved ones to suffer. If I was Terry Schiavo, I wouldn't want to live the way she did...and maybe if someone had asked HER what she wanted, that whole case wouldn't have been bought to the courts.




I already stated that life to me IS NOT worth living, and I don't care if anyone here calls me a coward because I want to live a life of DIGNITY and GRACE. If it means that I'm not a 'true' Christian because of that, then I guess I'm not, and I'm willing to face my own judgement if I decide that the day I can't run a mile or live my life the way I want to, is the day I die, then so be it.


1. Terry Schiavo couldn't answer nor could she say anything in a will, so how was anyone to know that she wanted to die? She was the innocent party, and I believe her husband helped her to get that way.

2. When I stated I didn't want my grandfather to suffer, I also said, "If it be God's will." don't overlook that last statement. I've been praying for God's will in his case, and He's decided to keep him here and in moderately good health.

If I felt like God was saying, "This is My will." then maybe; I might consider that option. But the direction needs to come from Him. For some, He might not want them to end their life soon because He might have something better in store for them in this life. I know two guys who lost their mom to cancer about two years ago. I'm sure they prayed, "God, whatever Your will, do it." she died. I'm sure she suffered with chemo-therapy, but I believe she wanted to live and was willing to go through that pain.

In another case of my grandpa, he had cancer. Took chemo-therapy. had two treatments left, and decided to stop doing them. Why? They were making him very sick and very bad-feeling. The doctor got mad at him, but that was his decision because he believed God was through with him and he was ready to leave. I dont' want that to happen, but if it does, I know it's God's will and I shouldn't stand in His way.

[LifeMaiden]

Well I was just going to post a sub-post and tell you Aravis that I didn't mean to get so heated about this...please don't take my statements personally. I may be speaking merely from experience in my own life. My grandfather had prostate cancer that was incurable and inoperable...and in his will, he did clearly state that he did not want to be on life support. However, if he DID NOT state this, then I surely wouldn't be the one to suddenly 'pull the plug' on him...not only would be that be akin to murder, but I don't know if, at that very given moment, I'd have the strength to do so. He was a Christian, a Baptist. But he did not believe that anyone's life should be one of indignity.


At the same time, I have also personally witnessed relatives who have suffered. My aunt, my mother's sister, was on a feeding tube for several years. As a Buddhist, not believing of course in an actual heaven, but most likely believing in reincarnation and other lives, I don't think my mother's family puts the same emphasis on 'life' in that sense as Christians do. But I remember that my aunt's eyes were extremely sad...and the eyes to me ARE the window of the soul. She was an active, vibrant woman before she became incapacitated with a stroke, could not feed herself, could not hold the ones she loved, and could only look imploringly at my mother, her closest sister, as if she wanted to have her life end. She died WITHOUT having the feeding tube removed, but I cannot help but think for those years, she really wanted to die.



Now, I haven't had any terminal illness or been incapacitated with extreme suffering physically, and there's a huge part of me that says," Sure, if someone said I had cancer I'd want to kill myself." But that time has not come. I like to pride myself honestly in thinking I am a strong willed woman, but it sounds pretty weak to say, " Just kill me or I'll go kill myself now, because I don't want to suffer." I know it sounds cowardly. There have been times in my life when I wanted to die, and even attempted so half-heartedly, but I guess at that point...it was not my time to die, clearly.

The will to LIVE has me torn deeply. At what point would I want to live so that I would be racking up countless bills even with insurance? At what point would I want to die because I felt I was a burden on everyone?

[OotP_Fan]

Some of what you say is purely ridiculous. I don't have the right to end my own life if I'm in pain and suffering and don't want to deal with it? I'm sorry, people, but regardless of what the Bible says about suicide, I'm not so arrogant to believe that MY life is worth saving if I'm in severe pain, or if I see someone suffering so badly like my parents, for example, who have stipulated clearly in their will that I am NOT to prolong their life. Does this mean I'm not valuing their life as sacred? Bull. I'm valuing their life as how they would want it to be lived...and that doesn't mean lying in a bed in a coma or vegetative state in pain.

I'm 'wasting' my life because I don't want to end up suffering with great pain? You can call me a coward, but saying than euthanasia is a 'waste' is a matter of opinion. It is NOT a matter of fact. You can argue that from a purely non religious point of view. And nothing anyone here can say to change the fact that yes, if I commit suicide because I don't want to DEAL with facing rounds and rounds of chemotherapy, or because I feel the dire need to end my life somehow, that I'm going to go to hell. So be it. I'm ready to face that judgement.


Sometimes, people think that just because you're 'living' that's supposed to be sacred. Yet prolonging someone on LIFE support is NOT God's doing...it's the human doing of machines and feeding tubes. And I will NOT allow my parents to suffer needlessly as they themselves have stated...to piss in a diaper, to be unable to feed themselves, or to live life WITHOUT dignity.

You people often amaze me. If you saw your parents or a beloved one suffering in pain, like on a battlefield where they were so severely wounded and disfigured that they begged you to end their life, would you sit there and say, " Sorry baby but your life is sacred and I won't end it even if it means you're gonna end up in a bad way anyways."

PLEASE! Spare me this argument about 'life is sacred' and it's NOT an act of heroism to end a life in extreme pain and suffering.

At what point is human life so sacred that it means a life of pain and suffering and endless torment?
It's all excuses though, LifeMaiden. People who say things like "I have the right to end my life because I'm in pain" don't have a strong enough belief in God and their purpose on earth.

Did I just read what I think I read? Spare me this argument? At what point is human life so sacred that it means a life of pain and suffering and endless torment?

Human life is sacred, LifeMaiden, whether or not it experiences torment and pain. It is not ANYONE's place, not anyone on this EARTH, to decide upon the culmination of their life. We are instruments of God. He created us, and He placed us here for a reason. It is SO WRONG, therefore, to assume that the unique souls we have been blessed with can be simply killed by a human's decision to put themselves out of their misery. I know you will respond with examples that give a person the right to end their or someone else's lives, but NO MATTER what the circumstance is, it IS and ALWAYS WILL BE WRONG to take a life. Something so wrong it is worthy of never feeling God's presence for an eternity.

Your username truly does betray your values. I'd reconsider the way you present yourself on this forum if, deep down, your morals conflict with the way you show yourself to other people.

[Neevil]

LM, I thought you were pro-life... May I ask, purely out of curiosity, if you were pregnant, and you found out that the baby had a birth defect or mental handicap or something, would you abort it?

Has anyone seen the movie Million Dollar Baby? I thought it was really depressing, and would not want to see it again. This is mostly because at the end of the movie, one of the main characters is injured while boxing, and becomes paralized. And, instead of finding something useful to do and moving on with her life, she completely looses hope and convinces her best friend to "pull the plug." Yes she was disabled, but there are a multitude of things she could have done. She could have gone to college, graduated, even gotten a job maybe. I don't think that living with "indignity" is a very good reason to die. Disabled or not, life is still life, and you have to do what you can with it. Also, you don't know what could happen. It is possible to be healed and overcome illness. If you kill yourself, or beg someone else to kill you, that's it. Your life is over for good. We only have one life, and it is too precious to end prematurely.

[Aravis Kenobi]

LM, I'm sorry for the way I may have stated things. I let it get personal, which is my main problem in these kind of things.

[inkspot]

Just a note, there is a vast difference between euthanasia, killing someone who is terminally ill or suffering in some way, and the "right to die," which is what people exercise when they ask that no "heroic measures" be taken to keep them living. That is, they do not want to be kept alive by machine.

The "right to die" in that sense I believe is real. No one should be forced to stay alive via artificial means, when if left on their own, their illness or injury would kill them. For instance, rejecting chemotherapy I think is an individual's choice, or signing something saying you do not want to be kept alive on a life support machine. Then when you are disconnected, or you refuse the treatment, you die when God wills.

But to ask someone to kill you because you are facing an illness, this is akin to murder. Or, as has been the case in Holland, just killing people because they are terminal (whether they ask for it or not) is, to my mind, murder.

LM, I did not mean to suggest you had no "right" to refuse treatment, or not to be kept alive by a machine ... but I don't think you ought to kill yourself if diagnosed with a terminal illness.

[The Half-Blood Prince]

Just a note, there is a vast difference between euthanasia, killing someone who is terminally ill or suffering in some way, and the "right to die," which is what people exercise when they ask that no "heroic measures" be taken to keep them living. That is, they do not want to be kept alive by machine.

The "right to die" in that sense I believe is real. No one should be forced to stay alive via artificial means, when if left on their own, their illness or injury would kill them. For instance, rejecting chemotherapy I think is an individual's choice, or signing something saying you do not want to be kept alive on a life support machine. Then when you are disconnected, or you refuse the treatment, you die when God wills.

But to ask someone to kill you because you are facing an illness, this is akin to murder. Or, as has been the case in Holland, just killing people because they are terminal (whether they ask for it or not) is, to my mind, murder.

LM, I did not mean to suggest you had no "right" to refuse treatment, or not to be kept alive by a machine ... but I don't think you ought to kill yourself if diagnosed with a terminal illness.
I was just about to respond with that point. Life supported by artificial means is not life at all, and so, from a religious standpoint (I don't see how it is possible to discuss this without the influence of religion) it is wrong to keep someone alive on a living energy that is not theirs, an energy that God did not intend to be present in their physical being. Say you are terminally sick and not supported by a life source other than your own, you have no right to take away the life God has granted you with.

[LifeMaiden]

It's never easy to talk about issues that require great sensitivity, such as abortion and euthanasia and the right to die. These issues affect everyone. So this is why sometimes we get so emotional about it. It's like I said...while I can SAY that should I become handicapped in some way or be diagnosed with a terminal illness...I can say NOW " I'd want to die" but then, we never will know what we'll do until we're truly faced with these predicaments. Some other member here stated that ' what does not kill us makes us stronger.' That could be true in some cases, and in other cases, it may not be.


Excuse me, but OotpFan, if you think my name 'betrays' my values, perhaps you might feel differently the day that you confront a loved one who is suffering and when you yourself are suffering to the point where you don't want to live. You are NOT God, and for you to say something about my name betraying my values saddens me, because clearly, you are speaking not out of experience, but out of judgement. You are not here to judge me, and I believe that God makes exceptions for people who do not believe that 'all life at any given time' is so sacred that it's worth living. By placing such a high value on life whether it's lived in indignity, suffering or shame, you run the risk of sounding arrogant and judgemental. You are not God, and you cannot speak for Him.

[LifeMaiden]

It's all excuses though, LifeMaiden. People who say things like "I have the right to end my life because I'm in pain" don't have a strong enough belief in God and their purpose on earth.

Did I just read what I think I read? Spare me this argument? At what point is human life so sacred that it means a life of pain and suffering and endless torment?

Human life is sacred, LifeMaiden, whether or not it experiences torment and pain. It is not ANYONE's place, not anyone on this EARTH, to decide upon the culmination of their life. We are instruments of God. He created us, and He placed us here for a reason. It is SO WRONG, therefore, to assume that the unique souls we have been blessed with can be simply killed by a human's decision to put themselves out of their misery. I know you will respond with examples that give a person the right to end their or someone else's lives, but NO MATTER what the circumstance is, it IS and ALWAYS WILL BE WRONG to take a life. Something so wrong it is worthy of never feeling God's presence for an eternity.

Your username truly does betray your values. I'd reconsider the way you present yourself on this forum if, deep down, your morals conflict with the way you show yourself to other people.

It's all excuses though, LifeMaiden. People who say things like "I have the right to end my life because I'm in pain" don't have a strong enough belief in God and their purpose on earth.

Did I just read what I think I read? Spare me this argument? At what point is human life so sacred that it means a life of pain and suffering and endless torment?

Human life is sacred, LifeMaiden, whether or not it experiences torment and pain. It is not ANYONE's place, not anyone on this EARTH, to decide upon the culmination of their life. We are instruments of God. He created us, and He placed us here for a reason. It is SO WRONG, therefore, to assume that the unique souls we have been blessed with can be simply killed by a human's decision to put themselves out of their misery. I know you will respond with examples that give a person the right to end their or someone else's lives, but NO MATTER what the circumstance is, it IS and ALWAYS WILL BE WRONG to take a life. Something so wrong it is worthy of never feeling God's presence for an eternity.

Your username truly does betray your values. I'd reconsider the way you present yourself on this forum if, deep down, your morals conflict with the way you show yourself to other people.



Who the *** are you to talk to me that way? You're not God...and you cannot claim to know God so well that 'taking a life is always wrong.' If I were you, I'd reconsider who I am as a CHRISTIAN before you make biased statements about my username. Your statement goes against what the Bible says: You are NOT the judge. You are NOT God. You have an opinion, and that's all. In the end, God will be the one to judge whether an act of heroism in taking the life of someone who begs to have it be ended will determine whether or not you spend eternity with Him, or in Hell. Because you are NOT God, you cannot determine whether or not 'all life' is so sacred that one wishing to die or stipulating in their will they do not want to be kept alive on life support. If you are not God, you cannot speak for him, and as I stated, when people such as yourself claim to 'know God' it's like...spare ME that kind of bull.

Since God makes exceptions, and we DO NOT know ultimately what His judgement would be, such as if I were on a battlefield and someone was wounded and asked me to end his or her life, I don't think I would sit there and tell them " hey your life is sacred. Sorry buddy, but I can't end it for you, because that means you don't have the true strength or belief in God."

Laughable and ridiculous.


If we are truly 'instruments' of God then clearly, God would want us to do the RIGHT thing...and how would YOU know if sparing or taking a life in CERTAIN rare given circumstances that it's so wrong a person would not experience God for an eternity?

And I don't need to tell you where I think at this point where you belong. It's people like you who make me wonder just what true Christian values are about with your judgemental know it all statement.

[LifeMaiden]

LM, I thought you were pro-life... May I ask, purely out of curiosity, if you were pregnant, and you found out that the baby had a birth defect or mental handicap or something, would you abort it?

Has anyone seen the movie Million Dollar Baby? I thought it was really depressing, and would not want to see it again. This is mostly because at the end of the movie, one of the main characters is injured while boxing, and becomes paralized. And, instead of finding something useful to do and moving on with her life, she completely looses hope and convinces her best friend to "pull the plug." Yes she was disabled, but there are a multitude of things she could have done. She could have gone to college, graduated, even gotten a job maybe. I don't think that living with "indignity" is a very good reason to die. Disabled or not, life is still life, and you have to do what you can with it. Also, you don't know what could happen. It is possible to be healed and overcome illness. If you kill yourself, or beg someone else to kill you, that's it. Your life is over for good. We only have one life, and it is too precious to end prematurely.


Actually you MISS the true point of being pro-life. I can say that I would speak for the unborn and I would not have a baby aborted just because it was diagnosed with mental retardation. THAT CHILD cannot speak on its own. What I referring to is when someone stipulates in their will they do NOT want to be kept on life support...how is that 'taking' a life when they're the ones who wish not to life? How is it 'murder' if you commit an act of heroism on someone who, in clear obvious pain and discomfort such as wounded and dying on a battlefield, begs you to end their life? I'm talking about life not for those who cannot speak for themselves, such as the unborn, versus those who wish to die and not be pissing in a diaper, living in torment and pain physically, and wanting to say good bye to loved ones rather than lie there and be unable to do anything for themselves on a machine.

[LifeMaiden]

Just a note, there is a vast difference between euthanasia, killing someone who is terminally ill or suffering in some way, and the "right to die," which is what people exercise when they ask that no "heroic measures" be taken to keep them living. That is, they do not want to be kept alive by machine.

The "right to die" in that sense I believe is real. No one should be forced to stay alive via artificial means, when if left on their own, their illness or injury would kill them. For instance, rejecting chemotherapy I think is an individual's choice, or signing something saying you do not want to be kept alive on a life support machine. Then when you are disconnected, or you refuse the treatment, you die when God wills.

But to ask someone to kill you because you are facing an illness, this is akin to murder. Or, as has been the case in Holland, just killing people because they are terminal (whether they ask for it or not) is, to my mind, murder.

LM, I did not mean to suggest you had no "right" to refuse treatment, or not to be kept alive by a machine ... but I don't think you ought to kill yourself if diagnosed with a terminal illness.



Yes but according to OoPtFan here or whatever their name is taking a life at all times is clearly a sin. He or she claims to be God.

[Aravis Kenobi]

Who the HELL are you to talk to me that way? You're not God...and you cannot claim to know God so well that 'taking a life is always wrong.' If I were you, I'd reconsider who I am as a CHRISTIAN before you make biased statements about my username. Your statement goes against what the Bible says: You are NOT the judge. You are NOT God. You have an opinion, and that's all. In the end, God will be the one to judge whether an act of heroism in taking the life of someone who begs to have it be ended will determine whether or not you spend eternity with Him, or in Hell. Because you are NOT God, you cannot determine whether or not 'all life' is so sacred that one wishing to die or stipulating in their will they do not want to be kept alive on life support. If you are not God, you cannot speak for him, and as I stated, when people such as yourself claim to 'know God' it's like...spare ME that kind of bull.

Since God makes exceptions, and we DO NOT know ultimately what His judgement would be, such as if I were on a battlefield and someone was wounded and asked me to end his or her life, I don't think I would sit there and tell them " hey your life is sacred. Sorry buddy, but I can't end it for you, because that means you don't have the true strength or belief in God."

Laughable and ridiculous.


If we are truly 'instruments' of God then clearly, God would want us to do the RIGHT thing...and how would YOU know if sparing or taking a life in CERTAIN rare given circumstances that it's so wrong a person would not experience God for an eternity?

And I don't need to tell you where I think at this point where you belong. It's people like you who make me wonder just what true Christian values are about with your judgemental know it all statement.


LM, take it easy. Don't let one person get on your nerves. We all get touchy in these situations; let's try to keep it controlled and non-personal, ok? I'm not discriminating against you, and everyone wants to make their opinions known. I do the same. Everyone means well; and they have their opinions. No person, dead or alive, is at the same level as God, and they never can be. Just realize that and let it go.

[LifeMaiden]

I'm not blessed with patience, Aravis, or a lot of tolerance when it comes to some people I guess. Everyone here knows that I can get really annoyed with statements that are so clear cut and dried it leaves NO room for thought or exceptions with God. Ultimately, if God is the judge, then no one else can say whether or not we'll be spending time with Him or in the fiery pit if we do take pity on someone in RARE and certain given circumstances. Yes, life is sacred, but even as someone pro-life who can say with impunity that an unborn baby's life should not be taken because clearly he or she has NO voice. But in some instances, a few adults in pain and suffering do. And I clearly doubt that they will be in 'hell' because they chose a dignified death.

[Aravis Kenobi]

I'm not blessed with patience, Aravis, or a lot of tolerance when it comes to some people I guess. Everyone here knows that I can get really annoyed with statements that are so clear cut and dried it leaves NO room for thought or exceptions with God. Ultimately, if God is the judge, then no one else can say whether or not we'll be spending time with Him or in the fiery pit if we do take pity on someone in RARE and certain given circumstances. Yes, life is sacred, but even as someone pro-life who can say with impunity that an unborn baby's life should not be taken because clearly he or she has NO voice. But in some instances, a few adults in pain and suffering do. And I clearly doubt that they will be in 'hell' because they chose a dignified death.

Neither am I. Why do you think I repeat what I say a lot? :rolleyes:
why doesn't everyone stop insulting people and their views and just state their opinions nicely and calmly? No one is God, and no one has the right to determine what's truly in a person's heart (though you can more than likely tell from their life, but that's beside the point)

[LifeMaiden]

Because some of us, like myself, are much more emotional than others sand have tempers. And a lot more blunt. :D

[Aravis Kenobi]

Me too. I hate it when people don't listen to me. I mean, at least let me say what I have to say.

[LifeMaiden]

I know when I was 16, part of frustration came from older people not taking my opinion seriously on matters. I was a lot more mature than most kids my age at that time because I thought very deeply on matters and issues that most of them didn't even care about...and this was a Catholic school I attended. It was sad to see that a lot of them were lackluster about things such as abortion and life and death issues. To me, even if I don't always respond to every opinion here, I value what younger people have to say, even if I don't agree with it. Sometimes it's true you can't teach an old dog new tricks. A younger mind is usually more flexible and open to interpretative thought.

[Aravis Kenobi]

I know when I was 16, part of frustration came from older people not taking my opinion seriously on matters. I was a lot more mature than most kids my age at that time because I thought very deeply on matters and issues that most of them didn't even care about...and this was a Catholic school I attended. It was sad to see that a lot of them were lackluster about things such as abortion and life and death issues. To me, even if I don't always respond to every opinion here, I value what younger people have to say, even if I don't agree with it. Sometimes it's true you can't teach an old dog new tricks. A younger mind is usually more flexible and open to interpretative thought.

These kids at my youth group probably wouldn't know what abortion is. Sadly.

[LifeMaiden]

It has been the bane of my life reacting suddenly and emotionally rather than rationally to issues that are touchy and very sensitive. Kids in college would get up and leave the classroom sometimes over things like the right to die, abortion, affirmative action, racism, you name it. Of course, I read OoptFan's statement BEFORE I read Inkspot's post about there being a difference between the right to 'die' and the right to take someone's life and so forth. :rolleyes:


My personal view however will not waiver, and my username does indeed reflect my value of LIFE despite what some individuals may think. In some instances, I believe it IS an act of heroism to end a life in great suffering and pain if it is requested for those who have a voice. And if as I stated, God is the judge, then no other human can say what WILL happen when we are judged for our actions in instances where there could be exceptions to the rule. It is far more cowardly to assume, in my opinion, that all life is so sacred there will NOT be times when individuals are called to act against what we might consider our own values.



Seeing a lot of war movies might have something to do with that and having some relatives in World War II and Korea who saw things no human should...like my uncle talking about this guy who had a flame thrower, and was hit by a bullet. The gas tank on his back exploded, and he was on fire from head to toe, screaming in pain. He would not have survived that fire. To NOT end his life at that given point to me is inhumane. You can't say God wanted him to burn to death like that and that because he wanted to die, he was being cowardly and not going to spend eternity with his maker. I personally could not live with MYSELF if I saw that and did not act to end his life.

[Aitoren]

Einstein himself died because he didn't want to undergo surgery because he thought it was artificially extending life, which I suppose you could argue. Everyone has an obligation to undergo treatments that might save their lives though. You can't be shot by the heart but still have a chance to live and reject having surgery. That would be throwing your life away by denying to care for your own life and body. However, if you've already undergone treatments and nothings seems to work, you have the right not to undergo more because they're just futile treatments. Also, as was mentioned before, if what's keeping you on earth isn't your own body, and it long ago would have died, you aren't obliged to delay your trip to heaven (or, granted, other places). What you cannnot decide is to throw away saving your body, but once that's gone or your living in it, but only thanks to the constant involvement of a machine, you can decide whether that machine needs to be there.

[LifeMaiden]

Well that's like my friend's mother, who was diagnosed with serious cancer of the colon and stomach two years ago. She has undergone surgery and EIGHT rounds of chemotherapy. Count that. EIGHT. She just finished the last round and there is nothing more that the doctors can do for her. She's on morphine and other painkillers...and is down to like 72 pounds.


Now another one of my mother's many sisters...my aunt...she fought for her life with her cancer. She lost after ten years after having undergone surgery to remove ONE lung, and then they had to take one lobe off her other lung. When she died she weighed about 60 pounds, couldn't feed herself, and was living on a machine by artificial means.

[inkspot]

Seems to have been a little heated in here last night. Let's try to stay calm, and not cuss at each other. Thanks. :)

I think most Christians believe that you are well within your moral framework to request no heroic measure to save your life, or to decline treatments which you do not want, in favor of allowing a disease to run its course, trusting God to take you to heaven when your time comes.

It is a very different thing to have in place a system (as in Holland) whereby a physician can kill patients he deems terminally ill. This is, to my mind, putting the physician in God's place.

I also do not think we need to make "assisted suicide" legal. One reason: suicide is final. You can't change your mind. I don't think we ought to make it easier for people who are already depressed because of pain or suffering to find ways to kill themselves. What if there were a brighter future ahead, but we went ahead and let Kevorkian kill them before they could get to it?

If we want to be a culture which cherishes life, then we have to cherish each llife. To put physicians, whose very oath begins with "first, do no harm," in the place of being executioners would be a terrible turn for our society to take.

[LifeMaiden]

That still doesn't answer my question regarding what you would do in the case of someone who, such as my uncle, witnessed someone who was shot in the back of a flamethrower and in such horrible pain and on fire...that ending his life would NOT be an act of heroism. This is where I beg to differ from people when they say things like ALL LIFE IS SACRED AT ALL TIMES. For the most part, yes. But what about in that case? Are you doomed to burn in hell because you chose to humanely end that man's life?

[inkspot]

Please God I never face such a situation.

Are you doomed to burn in hell because you chose to humanely end that man's life?
One thing, no one is doomed to burn in hell except those who do not embrace Christ as Savior. As long as your sins are counted to Christ's sacrifice, you will be with Him in eternity, no matter what your actions. So if you made this choice to kill someone, and you believe on Christ as Savior, your eternal home is still secure with Him.

And there is a vast chasm between having to decide on a battle field to mercy kill someone who is obviously not going to survive and giving doctors the duty to kill terminal patients, as has been granted in Holland.

Driven to the last extreme by the horror of war and filled with pity for someone half dead who yet still suffers, you might choose to kill and feel it was a mercy to the sufferer.

But what is the big rush to kill people like Ms Schiavo, who are not suffering, or to kill terminally ill patients who could have their death with dignity in a hospice?

An interesting Lewisian look at this concept is found in Perelandra, when the hero Ransom discovers the villain un-man Weston has been mutilating the little frogs by ripping their head up at the mouth. The poor things are still alive, but horribly crippled, so Ransom deems it a mercy to end their suffering ... then finds that he can't kill them without a great deal of work and wonders in the end if he didn't make them suffer more with his attempts to kill them. That would be a consideration, too, if you decided to kill your wounded buddy.

[PrinceOfTheWest]

Wars and terrible accidents create terrible dilemmas. I know what the official teaching of the Church is on such matters - that God alone determines when someone should die. In the circumstances your uncle witnessed, though - if I had a rifle in my hand and was watching as the man writhed in screaming agony as he burned to death, I don't know what I'd do.

Ransom's situation in Perelandra would have been different, since the victims were animals that didn't bear the image of God. It was no sin, but a mercy, for us to put down our last dog who was suffering terribly from lymphoma.

You're right, though, Ink - those circumstances don't apply to someone in a secure medical situation like Terry Schindler-Schaivo.

[Copperfox]

The flamethrower victim, as described, would be as good as dead already, so that shooting him would only shorten his suffering. It reminds me of the last movie version of "Last of the Mohicans," where the British officer who sacrificed himself to save the others is being roasted alive, so Hawkeye mercifully shoots him. But Terri Schiavo was nowhere within a thousand miles of being in such a position. She was capable of staying alive indefinitely--AND, very significantly, there were things which could have been tried to rehabilitate her WHICH HAD NOT BEEN TRIED.

Mike Schiavo, it should be noted, did not argue from the very start that Terri wanted to die. It was only AFTER he was finished using her to extract money from a court settlement that he "suddenly remembered" that she had wanted to die if she were helpless. Prior to that, he had let her sit largely neglected; he had refused to do for her even the simplest, most elementary things that might have stimulated her mind, like taking her for wheelchair strolls outdoors. Thus Terri Schiavo's case is far enough removed from the flamethrower victim that I can agree with LifeMaiden about the flamethrower victim, while at the same time agreeing with InkSpot about Terri Schiavo.

[inkspot]

Sorry, I did not mean to introduce another slant with the Schiavo thing; her story just came to my mind. The point, I think, is that in general, our belief in the sanctity of life makes suicide or euthanasia seem very sad; we believe with God there is always hope.
:)

[LifeMaiden]

Sorry, I did not mean to introduce another slant with the Schiavo thing; her story just came to my mind. The point, I think, is that in general, our belief in the sanctity of life makes suicide or euthanasia seem very sad; we believe with God there is always hope.
:)


I tend to be more pessimistic in my views of humanity, I think, is part of my problem. I know for a fact I have to ask God for strength every single minute of the day to keep my temper in check and my words softer rather than harsh and demeaning.


For me, honestly...I don't fear death or dying. I'd rather not die NOW, although, you never can tell what will happen. I have too much to do in God's name. Which is why we should always live each day as though it's our last.


I will however always and truly disagree with 'ALL life is ALWAYS sacred at ALL times.' In nearly all cases yes that is true...and I don't think that being pro-life means, for example, I'd stand by and watch someone like that soldier my uncle was talking about suffer like that. As hard as it would be, I would want to give him mercy with a bullet. And again, neither do I think because my name is LifeMaiden that I need to reconsider rare instances in which life might not be as 'sacred.' I also don't believe that if someone stipulates not to be on life support or whatever, that it means someone is automatically 'pro death. '

I am a believer, however, in a merciful God who makes exceptions from time to time regarding life and death issues.

[Neevil]

I think some people (including myself) misunderstood what you meant when you first said that you didn't always hold life to be sacred all the time, LM. The person who started this thread was talking about euthenasia for people who had 6 months to live, I think, so that's what I thought we were talking about here... In the exceptional cases, like the one your uncle saw, well... I don't really know. That's one of those tough things that no one really has a satisfactory answer for...

[LifeMaiden]

I think some people (including myself) misunderstood what you meant when you first said that you didn't always hold life to be sacred all the time, LM. The person who started this thread was talking about euthenasia for people who had 6 months to live, I think, so that's what I thought we were talking about here... In the exceptional cases, like the one your uncle saw, well... I don't really know. That's one of those tough things that no one really has a satisfactory answer for...



Well I understand that Neevil. I think though you know my personality a lot of times comes across much more strongly than I intend it to. Life IS sacred in nearly every single instance...from the unborn to the terminally ill. For MYSELF only...I truly cannot determine whether or not I'd have the courage to face some ailment or terminal illness to the point where I'd want to continue living. I'd like to think so, but I don't truly know that until it's been diagnosed or when I'm faced with something that tragic.

For a few exceptions, such as things that occur like tragedies in war, I can only say that I could not live with MYSELF if I saw someone burning up and screaming like that, or someone who was so wounded in a horrible way that he or she had no real chance of survival, without wanting to at least CONSIDER I'd pull the trigger and spare them the suffering.


It's like I said...God is merciful. I don't think He would want someone who is on the brink of death as that man my uncle described...to not have a quick and less horrible death.

[Aravis Kenobi]

What I'm about to say may or may not be off-topic.

Suppose a person is terminally ill and is wanting to be pulled off life-support. You know for a fact this person has never committed his or her life to Christ. Would you voluntarily pull that person off life-support knowing that they aren't going to heaven? Wouldn't you keep them alive long enough to share God's loving mercy with them? Is that being cruel or inhumane to keep them alive long enough to share Christ's love with them?

*no offense to anyone, just a question*

[LifeMaiden]

What I'm about to say may or may not be off-topic.

Suppose a person is terminally ill and is wanting to be pulled off life-support. You know for a fact this person has never committed his or her life to Christ. Would you voluntarily pull that person off life-support knowing that they aren't going to heaven? Wouldn't you keep them alive long enough to share God's loving mercy with them? Is that being cruel or inhumane to keep them alive long enough to share Christ's love with them?

*no offense to anyone, just a question*



That's a difficult question. They could already be another religion and have no desire to convert.

[Son of Adam]

What I'm about to say may or may not be off-topic.

Suppose a person is terminally ill and is wanting to be pulled off life-support. You know for a fact this person has never committed his or her life to Christ. Would you voluntarily pull that person off life-support knowing that they aren't going to heaven? Wouldn't you keep them alive long enough to share God's loving mercy with them? Is that being cruel or inhumane to keep them alive long enough to share Christ's love with them?

*no offense to anyone, just a question*

For me it would depend upon whether or not the person is totally brain dead with no brain stem activity at all, meaning that they are dead and their spirit has left for wherever it was bound.

On the other hand my stepfather when he was dying was in a coma, but still had good brain activity. So I prayed for him and asked him if he would like to receive Christ. I told him to somehow in his mind to pray with me to receive Christ as Savior. I would like to believe that he did, but I don't know.

[LifeMaiden]

For me it would depend upon whether or not the person is totally brain dead with no brain stem activity at all, meaning that they are dead and their spirit has left for wherever it was bound.

On the other hand my stepfather when he was dying was in a coma, but still had good brain activity. So I prayed for him and asked him if he would like to receive Christ. I told him to somehow in his mind to pray with me to receive Christ as Savior. I would like to believe that he did, but I don't know.

I think he did receive Christ as His Savior, honestly. I would like to think that when my mom is dying, she would receive Him as hers as well. It's sort of scary because many people in her family have not been saved...they're all Buddhist or Shinto. I do truly believe this is why they are more lax on right to die/right to life issues because as many of you know, Buddhists and I think Shinto ( which is the national religion of Japan...more people there claim that religion than Buddhism) believe in reincarnation, so if a body 'dies' the soul just gets transferred over and over to another life in future lives.


What's frightening to me, and this is purely selfish...is that when she dies, she won't be received in heaven because she isn't Christian...and I won't be reunited with her. But there's hope.

[Son of Adam]

LM...there is always hope.

[Into the Wardrobe]

There is always hope Michelle! I'll include your family in my prayers. That's gotta be difficult from your perspective. *Hugs* You know I care dearly about you my friend.

Ahhh...semantics...glad things got sorted out some.

I had another thought though about living with a terminal illness...I agree with Inkspot as well on things, just to clarify...and there's no way God can be left out of it. For me, it's more of a Lordship issue. It's tough to know why God does the things He does at times and why He lets certain things happen. We won't have all the answers in the shadowlands. That's ok. But even in a diagnosis, there can be hope.

I can't help but think of a few situations where there has been a diagnosis, but that wasn't the end of the story. My mom had chrones disease before I was born. She was supposed to die. God healed her and she's doing well now. Suffered for awhile, but God brought her through it. She now has no signs of Chrones. Also, there was a little baby girl my friends had and she was diagnosed with a tumor in her stomach that was inoperable and deadly. The baby's name was Gabby. Tons of people were praying for her and a few weeks later my friends came back saying that the cancer was gone. Gabby wasn't supposed to reach her first birthday. She's about 9 now. And then there's Carl. Our wonderful Son of Adam, formerly NightMystic, who also had cancer and was healed. Does God always choose to give a miracle and heal...no. But if these ones had given up hope the world would have never been the same. This forum would have never been the same. I look at Carl and see one who can compassionately talk to people who are suffering with such understanding and wisdom. I thank God for such a brother.

Refusing treatment that would make you suffer in the face of a terminal illness would be one thing...but to give up and do something drastic to end my life, something else. Not that there are not times when we'd want to. But, I don't want to take the choice to act out of God's hands. He may do something unexpected for unknown reasons. I agree that in the whole war scenario that it could be a mercy thing...don't know what I'd do.

I know that it may have be tough to live in an assisted manner...and it's more than ok to ask not to be kept alive on machines...but I look at people like Joni Erickson Tada and Maddie Stephonick (Please excuse the spellings), and know that it doesn't mean we can't make a difference. I can't help but think of Philippians 2...Jesus gave up his glory in heaven to become a man and die in the most disgraceful manner for us...He reminded one follower that He had no place to lay his head...and yet He had more rights to living in spleandor than anyone else ever could. He chose to give them up for a higher reason and asked that we do the same. It's understandable to want to live with dignity...but not a necessity. Jesus didn't in many ways while on earth. The main issue for Christians is knowing/loving God and building His Kingdom. We will have trouble on this earth, but we can take heart because God has overcome this world. The death we as believers have the biggest right to and need for is a daily one...death to ourselves in the want to put the Lord in His propper place...first place in hte driver's seat. It's the biggest struggle we'll all face in our lives. It isn't desirable to suffer...but it's a part of life. Lewis had a lot to say on it...I'll look up the quotes later since my computer has issues and I want to post this before getting involuntarily logged off again.

Added Lewis Quote: "Try to exclude the possibility of suffering which the order of nature and the existance of free-wills involve, and you find that you have excluded life."

[Copperfox]

LifeMaiden, Timbalionguy and I have discussed this issue of unconverted souls by e-mail. Since God is not restricted by time, He could fit a subjective hour into the objective two seconds between a person's next-to-last breath and last breath; and, unheard to anyone else, could speak to that person. Since Jesus has warned us that many WILL end up on the smooth broad road going downhill, this extra mercy would not be a catch-all that automatically saves EVERYONE who didn't otherwise get converted; but it is in character for God's merciful nature that He might give souls this CHANCE to repent at the last moment and be forgiven. And it would go a long way to answer the nagging question "What about people in remote lands who never heard the gospel?" If God does what I am speculating, they WOULD hear it at the end, just not in a way known publicly to other mortals.