Death with dignity passes in California ( faith perspective only)

Michie

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Feb 5, 2002
166,466
56,160
Woods
✟4,665,297.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
The 'Death With Dignity' bill passes in California. I know the RCC is against these types of laws. But my question is this, hospice gives medications not to speed up death but provide comfort in end of life stages. But I know the meds can hasten death as a side effect. I know the Church has no issues with hospice. What is the objection exactly to this law from the Church when it comes to terminally ill patients that choose this option? I know we are not supposed to hasten death purposely but if a person is dying and chooses not to go through a particularly grueling stage of illness then what is the Church's objection to someone opting out of a horrible death?
 

pdudgeon

Traditional Catholic
Site Supporter
In Memory Of
Aug 4, 2005
37,777
12,353
South East Virginia, US
✟493,233.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Republican
The 'Death With Dignity' bill passes in California. I know the RCC is against these types of laws. But my question is this, hospice gives medications not to speed up death but provide comfort in end of life stages. But I know the meds can hasten death as a side effect. I know the Church has no issues with hospice. What is the objection exactly to this law from the Church when it comes to terminally ill patients that choose this option? I know we are not supposed to hasten death purposely but if a person is dying and chooses not to go through a particularly grueling stage of illness then what is the Church's objection to someone opting out of a horrible death?

2324 Intentional euthanasia, whatever its forms or motives, is murder.
It is gravely contrary to the dignity of the human person and to the respect due to the living God, his Creator.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Leevo
Upvote 0

Michie

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Feb 5, 2002
166,466
56,160
Woods
✟4,665,297.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I'm still torn on Brittany Maynard's decision to die. Her death would had been horrific. Governor Brown consulted religious leaders as well. A Catholic Bishop was there, I would love to read the deliberations before the bill was passed.
 
Upvote 0

Sword of the Lord

In need of a physician.
Dec 29, 2012
13,959
7,532
Not in Heaven yet
✟145,284.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Engaged
I'm still torn on Brittany Maynard's decision to die. Her death would had been horrific. Governor Brown consulted religious leaders as well. A Catholic Bishop was there, I would love to read the deliberations before the bill was passed.
You need to stop watching shows that glorify this stuff and becoming emotionally attached. You also don't know if Jazz is a boy or a girl.
 
Upvote 0

Michie

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Feb 5, 2002
166,466
56,160
Woods
✟4,665,297.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Upvote 0

Sword of the Lord

In need of a physician.
Dec 29, 2012
13,959
7,532
Not in Heaven yet
✟145,284.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Engaged
You're not sure how you feel about Maynard's death. I'm sure you watched that sappy, death glorifying show/video of her that was put out in order to tug on your emotions. And you've said before that you watch I Am Jazz, and when I said he's a boy, you said you weren't sure about that. Another show to glorify sin that is intent on making you emotionally invested.
 
  • Like
Reactions: benedictaoo
Upvote 0

Michie

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Feb 5, 2002
166,466
56,160
Woods
✟4,665,297.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
No I did not watch the video. I saw the season finale of Jazz Jenning's show. I am not emotionally invested but I do feel compassion for their positions. It just sometimes appears that faith can be very cut and dry in complex situations and I am not cut and dry in complex situations. I'm a feeler. Whether that be considered good or bad, that is how I am.
You're not sure how you feel about Maynard's death. I'm sure you watched that sappy, death glorifying show/video of her that was put out in order to tug on your emotions. And you've said before that you watch I Am Jazz, and when I said he's a boy, you said you weren't sure about that. Another show to glorify sin that is intent on making you emotionally invested.
 
Upvote 0

MoonlessNight

Fides et Ratio
Sep 16, 2003
10,217
3,523
✟63,049.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Laws which allow for the so called "physician assisted suicide" always do one of two things. They either:

1.) Allow for anyone to demand suicide for any reason. There are obvious problems with this spiritually.

or

2.) Officially decide that certain people would be better off dead. If the state responds to one patient's plea for death with "you have too much to live for," and to another patient's plea for death with "sure thing, your life is too horrible to contemplate living" then they have said that the second patient is better off dead. Taking things further, they are also saying that anyone else in the same situation as the second patient is better off dead, even if they don't request to be killed.

There is no reconciling attempting to help a patient and attempting to kill a patient. Death may come as a side effect of treatment and this is acceptable, but it should never be the primary aim. A good benchmark test to determine what a certain action is seeking is to consider the following: if the patient unexpectedly improves in condition, though perhaps does not make a full recovery, will those treating the patient be overjoyed or disappointed.

For example, if a patient is using machines to breathe and is taken off of them, it may be expected that the patient will die. But suppose the patient does start breathing under his own power. If those involved would rejoice and continue to treat the patient, then there is nothing wrong with taking the patient off of the machines. If on the other hand those involved start to regret that they did not simply smother the patient, then this was a stand-in for a lethal injection.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

LivingWordUnity

Unchanging Deposit of Faith, Traditional Catholic
May 10, 2007
24,496
11,193
✟213,086.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Last edited:
Upvote 0

LivingWordUnity

Unchanging Deposit of Faith, Traditional Catholic
May 10, 2007
24,496
11,193
✟213,086.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
"Wherever usefulness is set above truth...then man becomes a slave to practical purposes and to those who make the decisions about what is useful and practical." - Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, Truth and Tolerance, p. 228
 
Upvote 0

Cos-play

Well-Known Member
Sep 29, 2015
777
348
58
✟2,816.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
Laws which allow for the so called "physician assisted suicide" always do one of two things. They either:

1.) Allow for anyone to demand suicide for any reason. There are obvious problems with this spiritually.

or

2.) Officially decide that certain people would be better off dead. If the state responds to one patient's plea for death with "you have too much to live for," and to another patient's plea for death with "sure thing, your life is too horrible to contemplate living" then they have said that the second patient is better off dead. Taking things further, they are also saying that anyone else in the same situation as the second patient is better off dead, even if they don't request to be killed.

There is no reconciling attempting to help a patient and attempting to kill a patient. Death may come as a side effect of treatment and this is acceptable, but it should never be the primary aim. A good benchmark test to determine what a certain action is seeking is to consider the following: if the patient unexpectedly improves in condition, though perhaps does not make a full recovery, will those treating the patient be overjoyed or disappointed.

For example, if a patient is using machines to breathe and is taken off of them, it may be expected that the patient will die. But suppose the patient does start breathing under his own power. If those involved would rejoice and continue to treat the patient, then there is nothing wrong with taking the patient off of the machines. If on the other hand those involved start to regret that they did not simply smother the patient, then this was a stand-in for a lethal injection.

Since you OBVIOUSLY haven't read the law and are, therefore, pulling this stuff out of thin air here is the link which shows that none of the above claptrap is actually, you know, factual.

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB128
 
Upvote 0

FlaviusAetius

Well-Known Member
Nov 17, 2012
1,545
462
✟18,998.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
Why should I care? The USA has zero adherence or love of God so why should I care that non Catholics and a good number of unfaithful Catholics decide they want to kill themselves?

Time and again the people have made it clear they want laws that only follow humanist views. Well the fact is looking at humanity without a divine perspective we are valueless which is why society doesn't even blink at the idea of killing the terminally ill or unwanted unborn. In fact they consider it a benefit to these groups to just die and quit being a waste of resources.

Why not be apathetic? I can't begin to describe how many times on OBOB alone I've heard "Making sin illegal is wrong, if you don't like X then don't do it!"

Maybe I should follow that advise starting here. I don't care if some dying stranger wants to kill themselves. I won't respect them, but frankly I don't see why I should care about people who don't even value their own life.
 
Upvote 0

MoonlessNight

Fides et Ratio
Sep 16, 2003
10,217
3,523
✟63,049.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Since you OBVIOUSLY haven't read the law and are, therefore, pulling this stuff out of thin air here is the link which shows that none of the above claptrap is actually, you know, factual.

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB128

I claimed that any law which allows for doctors to kill their patients would either allow anyone to request suicide, or alternatively restrict the option to those "whose lives are not worth living." The law in question restricts the option to those who are thought to be guaranteed to die within six months. The implication being that if you have less than six months to live, it is acceptable to have a doctor kill you, since your life isn't worth completing.

I'm sure that you don't like how I have framed the issue but I'm not seeing where I have said anything nonfactual.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Cos-play

Well-Known Member
Sep 29, 2015
777
348
58
✟2,816.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
I claimed that any law which allows for doctors to kill their patients would either allow anyone to request suicide, or alternatively restrict the option to those "whose lives are not worth living." The law in question restricts the option to those who are thought to be guaranteed to die within six months. The implication being that if you have less than six months to live, it is acceptable to have a doctor kill you, since your life isn't worth completing.

I'm sure that you don't like how I have framed the issue but I'm not seeing where I have said anything nonfactual.

The entire premise is non factual.

You do not have a clear understanding of how the laws work, what the safeguards are nor who can actually ask for and performs the service in the first place.
 
Upvote 0

MoonlessNight

Fides et Ratio
Sep 16, 2003
10,217
3,523
✟63,049.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
All of my claims boil down to this: if we say that it is acceptable for one person to kill himself (at least with certain "safeguards") and for another to not (regardless of any "safeguards") then we are saying that one person's life is more valuable than another's.

I do see that there are many requirements for options to be known, informed decisions to be made, etc. presumably to avoid people being pressured into taking their own lives. But if these safeguards are so air-tight, why not allow for anyone to take advantage of doctor-assisted suicide? Why limit it to the terminally ill?
 
Upvote 0

LivingWordUnity

Unchanging Deposit of Faith, Traditional Catholic
May 10, 2007
24,496
11,193
✟213,086.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
264_s_giovanni_paolo_II.png

Pope St. John Paul II (1978-2005)

"The Second Vatican Council, in a passage which retains all its relevance today, forcefully condemned a number of crimes and attacks against human life. Thirty years later, taking up the words of the Council and with the same forcefulness I repeat that condemnation in the name of the whole Church, certain that I am interpreting the genuine sentiment of every upright conscience: 'Whatever is opposed to life itself, such as any type of murder, genocide, abortion, euthanasia, or wilful self-destruction, whatever violates the integrity of the human person, such as mutilation, torments inflicted on body or mind, attempts to coerce the will itself; whatever insults human dignity, such as subhuman living conditions, arbitrary imprisonment, deportation, slavery, prostitution, the selling of women and children; as well as disgraceful working conditions, where people are treated as mere instruments of gain rather than as free and responsible persons; all these things and others like them are infamies indeed. They poison human society, and they do more harm to those who practise them than to those who suffer from the injury. Moreover, they are a supreme dishonour to the Creator.'" - Evangelium Vitae

"Brother kills brother. Like the first fratricide, every murder is a violation of the 'spiritual' kinship uniting mankind in one great family, in which all share the same fundamental good: equal personal dignity. Not infrequently the kinship 'of flesh and blood' is also violated; for example when threats to life arise within the relationship between parents and children, such as happens in abortion or when, in the wider context of family or kinship, euthanasia is encouraged or practised." - Evangelium Vitae

"On a more general level, there exists in contemporary culture a certain Promethean attitude which leads people to think that they can control life and death by taking the decisions about them into their own hands. What really happens in this case is that the individual is overcome and crushed by a death deprived of any prospect of meaning or hope. We see a tragic expression of all this in the spread of euthanasia-disguised and surreptitious, or practised openly and even legally. As well as for reasons of a misguided pity at the sight of the patient's suffering, euthanasia is sometimes justified by the utilitarian motive of avoiding costs which bring no return and which weigh heavily on society. Thus it is proposed to eliminate malformed babies, the severely handicapped, the disabled, the elderly, especially when they are not self-sufficient, and the terminally ill. Nor can we remain silent in the face of other more furtive, but no less serious and real, forms of euthanasia. These could occur for example when, in order to increase the availability of organs for transplants, organs are removed without respecting objective and adequate criteria which verify the death of the donor." - Evangelium Vitae
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: benedictaoo
Upvote 0

Cos-play

Well-Known Member
Sep 29, 2015
777
348
58
✟2,816.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
All of my claims boil down to this: if we say that it is acceptable for one person to kill himself (at least with certain "safeguards") and for another to not (regardless of any "safeguards") then we are saying that one person's life is more valuable than another's.

I reject the framing of this statement. What is really at issue here is someone's control over their own health and body. It has nothing to do with comparing the value of one life to another.

I do see that there are many requirements for options to be known, informed decisions to be made, etc. presumably to avoid people being pressured into taking their own lives.
I reject the supposition made on the end of this statement as overtly pejorative. There is no indication or experience with the right to die that suggests that people are being pressure into taking their own lives. This is a canard.

But if these safeguards are so air-tight, why not allow for anyone to take advantage of doctor-assisted suicide? Why limit it to the terminally ill?

I reject this statement as a straw man. The debate is about end of life options not anyone or anything else.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Athanasias

Regular Member
Jan 24, 2008
5,788
1,036
St. Louis
✟54,560.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! (Is 5:20)
 
Upvote 0