Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That is as it should be. I will do exactly the same. If I choose to check out a little early, I don't want you butting in, and I promise I won't butt in when the choice is yours.
You may disagree but life to me is a gift from GOD that should be cherished no matter what....and believe me i'm not the most religious guy in the world...however on this one issue I feel strongly about and no ifs or buts about it.
You may disagree but life to me is a gift from GOD that should be cherished no matter what....and believe me i'm not the most religious guy in the world...however on this one issue I feel strongly about and no ifs or buts about it.
Why don't we just start killing off the elderly...no need for them to live any longer being old and frail for rest of their years..just give them a pill..
Better yet, why don't we stop pretending our debate opponents hold views they clearly don't?
Duly noted...However no insult intended but I fear GOD more than I fear you or anyone else on this board..
I'm not quite sure why you would fear me or anyone else on this board. My point is simply, especially other religious people, may not share your conceptualization of god. And likewise, many may not have the same issue with assisted suicide for the terminally ill.
For those who don't know how/where to look - here is Oregon's FAQ about their physician-assisted suicide law and regulations. Frequently Asked Questions
One thing the FAQ doesn't mention. The statute was originally passed in 1997 by an initiative of the people. As you might expect, it won in the liberal (urban) areas, was opposed in the conservative (rural) areas. Either two or four years later (I don't remember), the legislature referred a repeal to the public. Which affirmed physician-assisted suicide by an even larger margin than the original vote. Because people had had the chance to see it in action, and *none* of the fears some people had about it actually came to pass.
I don't remember when the reporting requirement was added to the statute, but few people had any serious objection to the requirement, and the annual reports make for interesting reading.
In that regard, dying with dignity could include choosing not to take one's life. That was my point all along. I do not disagree with having the choice of assisted suicide and support it as long as that person is doing the choosing and not having someone else choose for them. I am simply saying that one choice or the other does not mean losing dignity.
I think dying with dignity does include the choice not to take one's life. I am saying that having the choice is empowering, either way.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
