Voluntary Euthanasia

[Bish bash bosh]

I'm not sure how those passages, that pretty much just says God makes humans, convey the message that humans have no right to take their own life if they wish to. Let alone that Christians can use laws to make this decision for others.

Here lies the problem my astute and erudite friend.

These passages are in the bible, however, it is humanity or more specific Christianity who has interpreted them.

Again the hypocrisy of it all, `they`decide on the interpretations then create `A` pseudo law which they feel fits snugly within it.

Bish

 

[savedbygrace05]

I'm not sure how those passages, that pretty much just says God makes humans, convey the message that humans have no right to take their own life if they wish to. Let alone that Christians can use laws to make this decision for others.

God the Creator is the author of life from start to finish, our lives are on loan to us and we must give an account one day to God for how we lived them, either with or without Him.

 

[Genersis]

God the Creator is the author of life from start to finish, our lives are on loan to us and we must give an account one day to God for how we lived them, either with or without Him.

So in your religion, we're accountable for our lives and actions because God bestowed life to us.
Ok.
But that's still not that relevant to euthanasia or what i said.

I am curious as to where these concepts of suicide being a sin are derived from in the bible.

But to be honest, pertaining to the legal side of things, in the end it doesn't matter whether your religion says it's wrong AND that you must stop others from committing it.
Subjectively true religious views alone aren't valid reasons to make or keep laws any more.
Not to say non-religious arguments against such is impossible.

 

[SithDoughnut]

God the Creator is the author of life from start to finish, our lives are on loan to us and we must give an account one day to God for how we lived them, either with or without Him.

So doing anything that shortens life expectancy, such as smoking or unhealthy eating, should also be banned? Or are we going to just hold euthanasia to that standard and pretend that everything else doesn't exist?

I imagine that God wouldn't hold such a double standard. I'm also pretty sure he gave us free will so we could use it, no?

 

[vespasia]

Have a look at Kathryn Greene-McCreight in Blackwells Christian Ethics. Should be accessible in a major city or good University library. SAGE publish a journal called Studies in Christian Ethics. You would need to have EBSCO access or similar Uni arangements to access it online.
Look for
Ars Moriendi to Assisted Suicide: Bonhoefferian Explorations into Cultures of Death and Dying Bernd Wannenwetsch
Studies in Christian Ethics, November 2011; vol. 24, 4: pp. 428-440.

Euthanasia and the Christian Understanding of God Paul Badham
Studies in Christian Ethics, April 1998; vol. 11, 1: pp. 1-12

Badham is pretty good at presenting the devils advocate arguement to make people think hard.


Both go into great detail as to why some think it a sin and some question if not acting is the sin.

 

[vespasia]

Sith. surely those scenarios could be classed as passive suicide whereas voluntary euthanasia conveys a more active intent.

 

[Eirlysa]

Its still grey Eirlysa.
The Catholic church itself does not advocate the use of 'exceptional medical means' to either prolong a persons dying or force them to continue living because of the sancitity of life arguement. Part of the question revolves around is it ethical for we humans to prevent a person from going to be with God?.

I'm aware of the church's teaching, and it is this: "The natural law and the Fifth Commandment requires that all ordinary means be used to preserve life, such as food, water, exercise, and medical care." If we're talking about very sick people with terminal illnesses undergoing treatments that are prolonging natural death but are deemed to be tiresome or distressing to the patient (morally defined as extraordinary), then they can cease treatment and let nature take its course. That's their choice, and that's not euthanasia.

Euthanasia, as I understand it, is more to do with people who may have a chronic illness, have been paralyzed in an accident, or are suffering from an incurable condition where death is not immient but don't wish to go on any longer.

So, they typically travel to a country where assisted suicide is legal, meet with someone from a specialised clinic who will give them a drink of life-ending liquids.. after consumation, they fall asleep, then into a coma, then eventually pass away. People that could have gone onto - in some cases - live for another 40 years. They call it "dying with dignity" -- but there is no dignity in death.

In other cases, it's people who are under such stress caring for their long-term sick relatives that in a moment of weakness they think that their relative would be better off dead and end their lives.

They should have more support and help. They are vulnerable people in difficult situations. At least in my opinion, no one has the right to take anyone's life, even their own, except God.

 

[SithDoughnut]

Sith. surely those scenarios could be classed as passive suicide whereas voluntary euthanasia conveys a more active intent.

Which makes no difference if life belongs to God. If you went to a friends house, intentionally left the fire on (knowing full well what could happen), and it burned their house down, would that not also be your fault?

If life is sacred and belongs to God, then any unnecessary action that shortens it would be morally wrong. I've never heard negligence to be a valid excuse, Biblically or otherwise.

 

[Paradoxum]

They call it "dying with dignity" -- but there is no dignity in death.

I'm not sure if that is true.

In other cases, it's people who are under such stress caring for their long-term sick relatives that in a moment of weakness they think that their relative would be better off dead and end their lives.

I agree that they shouldn't murder someone without their consent.

They should have more support and help. They are vulnerable people in difficult situations. At least in my opinion, no one has the right to take anyone's life, even their own, except God.

God has never taken anyone's life. Unless you think God is in the cancer. I would suggest that is quite a strange thing to think though. People die and it happens according to natural laws, not divine intervention. I'm not saying God isn't there, just that He isn't responsible for peaceful or horrible deaths.

 

[savedbygrace05]

So in your religion, we're accountable for our lives and actions because God bestowed life to us.
Ok.
But that's still not that relevant to euthanasia or what i said.

I am curious as to where these concepts of suicide being a sin are derived from in the bible.

But to be honest, pertaining to the legal side of things, in the end it doesn't matter whether your religion says it's wrong AND that you must stop others from committing it.
Subjectively true religious views alone aren't valid reasons to make or keep laws any more.
Not to say non-religious arguments against such is impossible.

God is the Creator and sustainer of mankind. Humanity are in rebellion against Him, which is abundantly evident by those like yourself on here.

I am not here to tell people what they should or should not do, but simply to point to absolute truth.

 

[savedbygrace05]

So doing anything that shortens life expectancy, such as smoking or unhealthy eating, should also be banned? Or are we going to just hold euthanasia to that standard and pretend that everything else doesn't exist?

I imagine that God wouldn't hold such a double standard. I'm also pretty sure he gave us free will so we could use it, no?

I am not here to tell people what they should or should not do, but simply to point to absolute truth.

 

[SithDoughnut]

I am not here to tell people what they should or should not do, but simply to point to absolute truth.

Which basically means that you are, you're just going to pretend you're not. Besides, it is not an absolute truth by any definition of the words.

 

[non-religious]

[savedbygrace]Show me please where in the bible it says that Christians are to adopt a worldview? I humbly suggest that you as a Christian revisit Ps 139 as the Makers guide to the sanctity of life.

As a Christian/human being/man etc.. I believe in compassion for my fellow human being. There are people in this country who can only communicate to the outside world via there eyes/blinking. I have absolutely no doubt some have learned to live with this and in no way want to even contemplate some form of assisted suicide.

Obviously, there are many who feel the exact opposite. Some of whom are able to make that informed decision prior to the escalation of their condition. Who are we to suggest that they are somehow making an immoral decision to do something that will subsequently prevent a very difficult and perhaps even a prolonged time of suffering?
Surely those having to contemplate such a future should, at the very least, be able to explore all viable options and in so doing, then be rigorously examined over a sustained period of time. This will ensure that they are absolutely sure of the path they choose to go down.

We're not talking about people being forced or coerced into signing their life away. That is not how it happens in countries that permit assisted suicide. Unless someone can provide evidence that it does..

 

[savedbygrace05]

Which basically means that you are, you're just going to pretend you're not. Besides, it is not an absolute truth by any definition of the words.

God and His Word are absolute truth, why else do you think that evangelical Christians are so unpopular!

 

[non-religious]

[SithDoughnut]Which basically means that you are, you're just going to pretend you're not. Besides, it is not an absolute truth by any definition of the words.

I agree..

 

[savedbygrace05]

As a Christian/human being/man etc.. I believe in compassion for my fellow human being. There are people in this country who can only communicate to the outside world via there eyes/blinking. I have absolutely no doubt some have learned to live with this and in no way want to even contemplate some form of assisted suicide.

Obviously, there are many who feel the exact opposite. Some of whom are able to make that informed decision prior to the escalation of their condition. Who are we to suggest that they are somehow making an immoral decision to do something that will subsequently prevent a very difficult and perhaps even a prolonged time of suffering?
Surely those having to contemplate such a future should, at the very least, be able to explore all viable options and in so doing, then be rigorously examined over a sustained period of time. This will ensure that they are absolutely sure of the path they choose to go down.

We're not talking about people being forced or coerced into signing their life away. That is not how it happens in countries that permit assisted suicide. Unless someone can provide evidence that it does..

Christians who are serious about their faith and God's Word soon learn to understand that God's Word is given for all of humanity, and is not to be compromised, no matter how unpopular it makes us.

 

[Eirlysa]

God has never taken anyone's life.

Job 1:21 -- the Lord gives life, the Lord takes it away.

Unless you think God is in the cancer.

No, God isn't in cancer and God does not give people cancer. He may allow the possibility of someone developing cancer, though.

I'm not saying God isn't there, just that He isn't responsible for peaceful or horrible deaths.

Nothing can happen in the world unless God permits it.

 

[vespasia]

Nothing can happen in the world unless God permits it.

Which then takes us right back to the old problem of evil and Epicurus......

Sith th ebig problem in the choices many people make is this- they do not consider the potential consequences. If they did perhaps we would not have para-suicides featuring in the mortality stats.

As for the fire analogy- not everyone is trained to make risk assessments and rely on past experiences ie the house did not burn down last time therefore it will be safe this.

For the record my personal moral preferance is in line with Victorian ethicists who contributed to the repealed law on Suicide to not to send someone uncalled for into Gods presence; I differ to them in favouring such folk recieve medical help rather than a criminal conviction for attempted self murder.

 

[Nabobalis]

God and His Word are absolute truth, why else do you think that evangelical Christians are so unpopular!

Or evangelical Muslims? Just how unpopular something is doesn't relate to how true something is.

 

[non-religious]

[savedbygrace05]Christians who are serious about their faith and God's Word soon learn to understand that God's Word is given for all of humanity, and is not to be compromised, no matter how unpopular it makes us.

You're saying absolutely nothing I haven't heard a million times from a million different people and I genuinely respect your stance on such issues. I mean that sincerely
My convictions re my faith are just as strong as yours, but mine lead me in a different direction. It is very easy to make the blanket statement about God does things this way and His ways are not ours etc...

However, real life seems to, at times, throw us into circumstances that no amount of Bible thumping, scripture throwing and sanctimonious pontificating can either answer or offer any real substantial assistance. I am not in a position to second guess what it would be like to endure certain illnesses. I just believe that people of all persuasions should have the right, under strict guidance, to decide how they want to face a certain life changing situation.

I appreciate where you're coming from though.