Vatican official calls assisted suicide of U.S. woman "reprehensible"

[Michie]

VATICAN CITY --

The Vatican's top bioethics official calls "reprehensible" the suicide of an American woman suffering terminal brain cancer who stated she wanted to die with dignity.

Monsignor Ignacio Carrasco de Paula, the head of the Pontifical Academy for Life, told the ANSA news agency on Tuesday that "dignity is something other than putting an end to one's own life."

Brittany Maynard's suicide in Oregon on Saturday, following a public declaration of her motives aimed at sparking political action on the issue, has stirred debate over assisted suicide for the terminally ill.

Continued- Brittany Maynard's assisted suicide condemned by Vatican official - CBS News

 

[LivingWordUnity]

Without judging the tragic circumstances of the woman, this encourages a dangerous precedent.

"Then they will begin to say to the mountains, ‘Fall on us’; and to the hills, ‘Cover us.’" - Luke 23:30

"And in those days men will seek death and will not find it; they will long to die, and death will fly from them." - Rev. 9:6

 

[Michie]

Without judging the tragic circumstances of the woman, this encourages a dangerous precedent.

I agree 100%. The media are glorifying the act. Doesn't it take more bravery to live?

 

[AvilaSurfer]

For years suicide has been called the coward's way out, by friends and family. Now all of a sudden, this woman is brave. ?????

 

[Maynard Keenan]

I fully welcome you all to decline choosing this option, and to encourage people to make the choice you believe to be most moral and right. I would hope you wouldn't use the power of government to deprive me of making a choice for myself, even if you think that choice is immoral and reprehensible.

 

[MoonlessNight]

For years suicide has been called the coward's way out, by friends and family. Now all of a sudden, this woman is brave. ?????

It is supposed to be brave because it is going against the common opinion and charting one's own destiny.

We know that it is going against common opinion because all of the major media outlets tell us so.

Just like how we know that when a theater department presents a play which is hostile to Christianity to an audience of academics which are also hostile to Christianity, this is also brave.

I fully welcome you all to decline choosing this option, and to encourage people to make the choice you believe to be most moral and right. I would hope you wouldn't use the power of government to deprive me of making a choice for myself, even if you think that choice is immoral and reprehensible.

It's nearly impossible for the government to prevent someone from committing suicide, so that any laws against suicide amount to a government approval of the practice.

What can be outlawed is assisted suicide, but assisted suicide isn't really just your choice, is it? It involves the person who assists you. And since clearly we do not want to allow anyone to assist anyone else in suicide (both because we think that most suicides are tragic, and because from a practical purpose it would make a very convenient alibi in murders), we have to come to a way of deciding which people are allowed to be assisted in suicide.

Can you not see that when we do this we are saying that some people have lives that are worth less than others? How can we say that a cancer patient can be assisted in suicide because of pain from the disease, but a high school student can't be assisted in suicide because of pain from a broken relationship, unless we say that one life is worth less, or that one decision is worth less?

 

[LivingWordUnity]

I fully welcome you all to decline choosing this option, and to encourage people to make the choice you believe to be most moral and right. I would hope you wouldn't use the power of government to deprive me of making a choice for myself, even if you think that choice is immoral and reprehensible.

As a Catholic, I believe that suicide is not a moral option. As an American, I have a right to vote in accordance with my moral conscience. Laws by their nature dictate someone's morality onto society. Suicide was never something that the state could prevent or punish someone for doing anyway. How can someone be punished by the state when they are dead? What the Church is against is calling suicide a moral good.

 

[Cosmic Charlie]

Well, that's an opinion.

(wols says I can say this)

 

[AvilaSurfer]

I fully welcome you all to decline choosing this option, and to encourage people to make the choice you believe to be most moral and right. I would hope you wouldn't use the power of government to deprive me of making a choice for myself, even if you think that choice is immoral and reprehensible.

Where did that come from? Nobody is talking about government. Except you.

 

[MikeK]

For years suicide has been called the coward's way out, by friends and family. Now all of a sudden, this woman is brave. ?????

We've called suicide bombers cowards for years, while applauding the bravery of our servicemen when they face great risks or even certain death for causes we support. We've never been real consistent about what we call bravery.

 

[AvilaSurfer]

We've called suicide bombers cowards for years, while applauding the bravery of our servicemen when they face great risks or even certain death for causes we support. We've never been real consistent about what we call bravery.

Apples and oranges. And the comparison stinks.

 

[Michie]

From ANSA:

Vatican official denies dignity in suicide, commenting on Brittany Maynard death

Vatican condemns Brittany suicide (ANSA)
Commenting on the highly publicized death of Brittany Maynard, the president of the Pontifical Academy for Life remarked that suicide is “an absurdity.”
"We don't judge people, but the gesture in itself is to be condemned," said Msgr. Ignacio Carrasco de Paula. He contested the claim that Maynard, who was suffering from terminal brain cancer, had died with dignity. “Dignity,” he said, “is something different from ending your own life.”

 

[MoonlessNight]

We've called suicide bombers cowards for years, while applauding the bravery of our servicemen when they face great risks or even certain death for causes we support. We've never been real consistent about what we call bravery.

If our servicemen beat the odds, and escaped from "certain death" unscathed, would we still call them brave? Of course we would. So we are not calling them brave for their deaths, but for their willingness to face death.

 

[bill5]

For years suicide has been called the coward's way out, by friends and family.

YOUR friends and family, perhaps. You don't exactly speak for all "friends and family." I'm sure some would agree with you, some would not.

I fully welcome you all to decline choosing this option, and to encourage people to make the choice you believe to be most moral and right. I would hope you wouldn't use the power of government to deprive me of making a choice for myself, even if you think that choice is immoral and reprehensible.

? If you really want to commit suicide, neither we nor the "power of government" can stop you.

Can you not see that when we do this we are saying that some people have lives that are worth less than others?

? "We" aren't doing it. SHE did it. And I doubt she thought her life was more or less valuable than others', generally speaking.

How can we say that a cancer patient can be assisted in suicide because of pain from the disease, but a high school student can't be assisted in suicide because of pain from a broken relationship, unless we say that one life is worth less, or that one decision is worth less?

We can't, because that's an invalid analogy, and nobody is saying that anyway.

Apples and oranges. And the comparison stinks.

No, apples and apples. In both cases, someone is putting their life on the line for a cause they believe in.

 

[AvilaSurfer]

No, apples and apples. In both cases, someone is putting their life on the line for a cause they believe in.

In completely different circumstances. Context counts, whether you want to admit it or not. It's still apples and oranges.

 

[MoonlessNight]

We can't, because that's an invalid analogy, and nobody is saying that anyway.

No, apples and apples. In both cases, someone is putting their life on the line for a cause they believe in.

Got it. Soldiers fighting a desperate battle, but hoping to survive it, are exactly the same as suicide bombers, who want to die to accomplish their goals.

But at the same time, while you stress that SHE is the one committing suicide (even though that is not strictly speaking true, since she was assisted) so that HER choice is what is the primary concern in the discussion, we cannot compare her decision to people who choose to commit suicide for what we would consider to be poor reasons.

"This analogy is valid/invalid" is not synonymous with "this analogy supports/does not support my position."

 

[Chrystal-J]

The media are glorifying the act. Doesn't it take more bravery to live?

I agree.

 

[bill5]

In completely different circumstances. Context counts, whether you want to admit it or not. It's still apples and oranges.

Hardly. One more time: both are putting their lives on the line for something they believe in. In that regard, they are the same. Just because the circumstances aren't exactly the same doesn't mean they're "completely different" and the point I made remains even if they were - they are both brave. If you want to pretend otherwise, knock yourself out.

Got it. Soldiers fighting a desperate battle, but hoping to survive it, are exactly the same as suicide bombers, who want to die to accomplish their goals.

Twisting people's words sure is popular here. Refer to my comments above, which I won't restate again - if you still can't grasp them, perhaps you can get someone to help spell it out for you.

"This analogy is valid/invalid" is not synonymous with "this analogy supports/does not support my position."

Hurray, we agree on something (and God bless irony).

 

[TravelerFarAwayFromHome]

ultimately it comes down to whether one believes suicide is a mortal sin or not,

 

[AvilaSurfer]

Hardly. One more time: both are putting their lives on the line for something they believe in. In that regard, they are the same. Just because the circumstances aren't exactly the same doesn't mean they're "completely different" and the point I made remains even if they were - they are both brave. If you want to pretend otherwise, knock yourself out.

100% wrong. Good night Irene.