Euthanasia

[Skeetergirl291]

I'm doing a speech against Euthanasia at my school and I would really like to hear some people's ideas on the subject.
Thanks!

[brianthephysicist]

Euthanasia is a disgusting practice that strikes directly at the dignity of human beings. It's a claim that because a person isn't "useful" or "productive", or if no one feels like taking the responsibility of care for that person, then we should be able to "discard" them like trash. Disgusting. From conception to natural death, I don't need anyone but God deciding when my time is up.

[4588686]

[quote name='brianthephysicist' timestamp='1325884276' post='2364111']
Euthanasia is a disgusting practice that strikes directly at the dignity of human beings. It's a claim that because a person isn't "useful" or "productive", or if no one feels like taking the responsibility of care for that person, then we should be able to "discard" them like trash. Disgusting. From conception to natural death, I don't need anyone but God deciding when my time is up.
[/quote]

If your really a physicist then you should understand something about the importance of empirical evidence. Modern arguments for euthanasia are predicated on the right of the individual to choose when to die, not of others to make that decision for him. Those arguments may not be valid but you have, intentionally or not, totally misrepresented them.

[dairygirl4u2c]

it's arguably a moral thing to allow people to kill themselves. i honestly have difficulty deciding the morality of it, but i'd lean towards being more moral to allow someone to kill themselves than not.
two sides of the coin. on one side, we all i think instictively allow for killing a dog when it is sick and tortured 'putting him out of his misery' we call it. yet it's wrong to allow people to do this? we're to keep the person in his misery? on the other hand, someone once pointed out the virtue involved with someone holy like JPII, when they refuse to take their own life and voluntarily live a tortured life. is it moral particularly when ya consider someone holy like that?
i'd say people could reasonably disagree about what is best for JPII if you were in his shoes. what brings me 'to the dark side' is that it's always a virtuous thing to allow people the freedom to decide things for themselves. is it moral to keep someone alive who is tortued, when it is their wish to die? that seems too cruel for me to think it's moral. individual liberty is often tauted by conservatives for a reason... and it should be here, too.

[brianthephysicist]

[quote name='Hasan' timestamp='1325886079' post='2364126']
If your really a physicist then you should understand something about the importance of empirical evidence. Modern arguments for euthanasia are predicated on the right of the individual to choose when to die, not of others to make that decision for him. Those arguments may not be valid but you have, intentionally or not, totally misrepresented them.
[/quote]
Wait....I'm confused as to what you're talking about when you say empirical evidence....

I'm sorry that it seemed like those were the arguments being used. That was not my intention. I was not trying to explain the arguments used in the issue, but rather the motives behind it. I should have been more explicit with my language.

You are correct, more often than not, the arguments I hear are based on an individual's right to choose death. But in my own personal life, I have only seen people argue for euthanasia because of the selfish reasons I mentioned earlier. Their choice of argument has been an individual's right to choose death, but the motives behind the argument are what I described earlier. Maybe there are people out there that choose euthanasia for other reasons, but this is all that I have come across.

[Amppax]

Well here is the Catechism on the subject:

[quote]
[b][size=5]Euthanasia[/size][/b]

[size=4][font=arial,helvetica,sans-serif][color=#202020][b]2276[/b] Those whose lives are diminished or weakened deserve special respect. Sick or handicapped persons should be helped to lead lives as normal as possible.[/color]

[color=#202020][b]2277[/b] Whatever its motives and means, direct euthanasia consists in putting an end to the lives of handicapped, sick, or dying persons. It is morally unacceptable.[/color][/font][/size]

[size=4][font=arial,helvetica,sans-serif][size=3][color=#202020]Thus an act or omission which, of itself or by intention, causes death in order to eliminate suffering constitutes a murder gravely contrary to the dignity of the human person and to the respect due to the living God, his Creator. The error of judgment into which one can fall in good faith does not change the nature of this murderous act, which must always be forbidden and excluded.[/color][/size]

[color=#202020][b]2278[/b] Discontinuing medical procedures that are burdensome, dangerous, extraordinary, or disproportionate to the expected outcome can be legitimate; it is the refusal of "over-zealous" treatment. Here one does not will to cause death; one's inability to impede it is merely accepted. The decisions should be made by the patient if he is competent and able or, if not, by those legally entitled to act for the patient, whose reasonable will and legitimate interests must always be respected.[/color]

[b]2279[/b][/font][/size][color=#202020][font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=1][size=4][font=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Even if death is thought imminent, the ordinary care owed to a sick person cannot be legitimately interrupted. The use of painkillers to alleviate the sufferings of the dying, even at the risk of shortening their days, can be morally in conformity with human dignity if death is not willed as either an end or a means, but only foreseen and tolerated as inevitable Palliative care is a special form of disinterested charity. As such it should be encouraged[/font][/size].[/size][/font][/color][/quote]

and here is the Catechism on suicide (free of charge!):

[quote]
[size=5][b]Suicide[/b][/size]
[size=4][font=arial,helvetica,sans-serif][color=#202020][b]2280 [/b]Everyone is responsible for his life before God who has given it to him. It is God who remains the sovereign Master of life. We are obliged to accept life gratefully and preserve it for his honor and the salvation of our souls. We are stewards, not owners, of the life God has entrusted to us. It is not ours to dispose of.[/color]

[b]2281 [/b][color=#202020]Suicide contradicts the natural inclination of the human being to preserve and perpetuate his life. It is gravely contrary to the just love of self. It likewise offends love of neighbor because it unjustly breaks the ties of solidarity with family, nation, and other human societies to which we continue to have obligations. Suicide is contrary to love for the living God.[/color]

[color=#202020][b]2282 [/b][/color][color=#202020]If suicide is committed with the intention of setting an example, especially to the young, it also takes on the gravity of scandal. Voluntary co-operation in suicide is contrary to the moral law.[/color]

[color=#202020]Grave psychological disturbances, anguish, or grave fear of hardship, suffering, or torture can diminish the responsibility of the one committing suicide.[/color]

[b][color=#202020]2283 [/color][/b][color=#202020] We should not despair of the eternal salvation of persons who have taken their own lives. By ways known to him alone, God can provide the opportunity for salutary repentance. The Church prays for persons who have taken their own lives.[/color][/font][/size]

[/quote]

[stevil]

Making Euthanasia against the law, you are forcing your beliefs onto others.
There are many people that don't believe a compassionate end to suffering requested by the patient is a sin, especially an athiest.
What value does it add to society to enforce this restriction into law? What business is it of yours if someone acts to end their own suffering?

[Luigi]

Euthanasia is murder. It's that simple.

[MaryJJD]

Firstly, it takes away life (that Gods given) and as such, we can't choose to take it-granted, thats a religious stance, but the second problem with euthanasia is where do you draw the line of ending the life of someone else? what constitutes informed consent? what about people unconscious? what about those with a mental disability? what about age?

I've often wondered why do people desire it so much? is whatever pain or pallative care not sufficient? is it evidence of a breakdown in society? is there inadequate care? are the family members aren't involved? its a complex issue in terms of why someone would want to give someone else the right to kill them or why a family would ask that for their relative (is it too hard to be with someone who suffers or is sick, is the cost too high?), but I think that 'why' is incredibly important to understand the passion in this issue, and would point probably to difficulites in pain managment, feelings of loosing control, being unloved or being a burden to others. I have a friend who cared for their grandma who had a stroke for three years at home before she died-and she couldn't do anything for herself, and yet, that tiny smile, that brief touch she gave occassioanlly was enough to say how thankful she was for the care and love given to her by her family. It was incredibly beautiful-to love someone for not what they can do, but for who they are. My ancestral family used to have the custom of doing this-in europe, where the son-in-law even helped to look after great grand ma, complete with diaper, and yet-full of love-it was a happy family inspite of the difficulties.

I apologise for sounding harsh in my questions while thinking on this issue-I know people have great love for others and don't mean to construe or imply anything for anyones personal life from this response, and I hope no one takes offence. God bless.

Edited January 8, 2012 by MaryJJD

[Ice_nine]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1325998600' post='2364849']
Making Euthanasia against the law, you are forcing your beliefs onto others.
[/quote]

And by making euthanasia legal you would be pushing your beliefs onto ours, and this central belief is that autonomy and self-ownership is an inherent right, therefore relegating morality into the private sphere.

Catholics push against this ideology and are told we are forcing our beliefs, but yet we're supposed to accept the philosophy of self-ownership as the basis of human rights hook line and sinker cause that's just "the way things are." You see, secular culture is also forcing its beliefs on religious. It just won't admit it or doesn't see it. Yeah, I won't let my beliefs be privatized and confined to myself. At least I admit it. The same fallacy is seen within the tolerance movement. They don't tolerate people who don't tolerate modern philosophy and thus violate their own principle. Those who don't ascribe to this tolerance bs are therefore not contradicting themselves when they won't tolerate bs hehe.

When we allow anyone to become the arbiter of life and death, and say that human life can be exterminated if one simply [i]wills[/i] it, that is highly disturbing to me and a morbid philosophy.

[Strictlyinkblot]

If we give people the right to die when does it become the duty to die? When will people feel pressured because of the cost of care or because family don't want to care for them anymore? How can we guarantee that only those who have made the decision themselves without any outside pressure.

In Holland where euthanasia is legalised within limited circumstances, i.e. the person has to agree to it, when doctors were surveyed at least three-quarters of them said that they euthanised a patient who did not specifically ask for it (I'm not sure of the reference)

Remember, in England abortion is only legal if two doctors agree that it would damage the woman's physical or mental health yet it is extremely easy to get an abortion. Limits placed on laws are easy to get around.

[stevil]

[quote name='Ice_nine' timestamp='1326087576' post='2365535']
And by making euthanasia legal you would be pushing your beliefs onto ours, and this central belief is that autonomy and self-ownership is an inherent right, therefore relegating morality into the private sphere.
[/quote]
I've discussed this with you before.
I've stated my stance that every possible action is a right.

Any restrictions put on this is a violation on these rights. Some of these are justified, some are not.
Law restricts rights, it does not create them.

A law against euthanasia restricts the right for a person to euthanise themselves. If your god has a problem with this then this god can judge these people in the afterlife, presumably this god's judgement will be perfect, therefore there is no need for government to provide this judgement on earth.

[Byzantine]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1325998600' post='2364849']
What business is it of yours if someone acts to end their own suffering?
[/quote]

I consider the small jump from allowing people to choose when to die to allowing people to choose when others die a rather concerning thing, in addition to all the other stuff that's been said.

[MissScripture]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1325998600' post='2364849'] What business is it of yours if someone acts to end their own suffering?
[/quote]
Following that logic, no one should intervene when someone wants to commit suicide for any reason.

[Ice_nine]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1326151685' post='2365945']
I've discussed this with you before.
I've stated my stance that every possible action is a right.[/quote]

Good for you. Unfortunately I and many others agree this stance is unsubstantiated bs. So now what happens? Why should I have to concede to this stance? This is where you contradict yourself. You are, in effect, trying to push this philosophy onto others. That's dandy and all but when you tell others that they are "pushing their beliefs onto others" understand that you're doing the same.

[quote]Any restrictions put on this is a violation on these rights. Some of these are justified, some are not.
Law restricts rights, it does not create them.[/quote]

You have a screwy idea of what rights are. But do tell me what [i]does[/i] create rights?

[quote]
A law against euthanasia restricts the right for a person to euthanise themselves. If your god has a problem with this then this god can judge these people in the afterlife, presumably this god's judgement will be perfect, therefore there is no need for government to provide this judgement on earth.[/quote]

You're trying to tell me how to practice my religion. It doesn't work like that.