toldailytopic: Should assisted suicide be legalized?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Nathon Detroit

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
The TheologyOnline.com TOPIC OF THE DAY for January 13th, 2010 11:03 AM


toldailytopic: Should assisted suicide be legalized?






Take the topic above and run with it! Slice it, dice it, give us your general thoughts about it. Everyday there will be a new TOL Topic of the Day.
If you want to make suggestions for the Topic of the Day send a Tweet to @toldailytopic or @theologyonline or send it to us via Facebook.
 

This Charming Manc

Well-known member
God has given let God take away ........

The TheologyOnline.com TOPIC OF THE DAY for January 13th, 2010 11:03 AM


toldailytopic: Should assisted suicide be legalized?






Take the topic above and run with it! Slice it, dice it, give us your general thoughts about it. Everyday there will be a new TOL Topic of the Day.
If you want to make suggestions for the Topic of the Day send a Tweet to @toldailytopic or @theologyonline or send it to us via Facebook.
 

Son of Jack

New member
:nono:

Sanctity of life should be consistently applied from the cradle (and before) to the grave.

But like Chrys said, there is a difference between actively taking life and passively allowing nature to run its course.
 

chatmaggot

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
I recall a thread a year or so ago along the same lines is this daily topic. It was interesting to see several responses that I wasn't expecting.

Now I will admit, the topic wasn't exactly the same...but it was kind of similar. The difference was that someone wasn't trying to commit suicide. The similarity was that someone was helping someone else die.

The scenario was brought up suppose that you were captured by the enemy and they were about to burn you at the stake. It seemed to be a consensus that people would (1) want to be killed prior to being burnt by the enemy and (2) if there was someone hiding the hills with the ability to shoot and kill the soon to be burned at the stake person, they would do it.

The conversation then turned to euthanasia in general. But here is how I think it all ties together.

Suppose you were captured by the enemy and were about to be tortured to death or burned at the stake. Would you try to kill yourself to avoid going through the trouble of being burned alive? If so, that would be suicide. Now suppose that you and another person made a pact. That pact is that IF either of you were to be captured and were about to be burned at the stake, AND your attempt at killing yourself failed, THEN the other person (assuming they had the opportunity) would kill the other person (getting a shot off while hiding from the enemy) so that they wouldn't have to suffer by being burned alive.

Isn't this the same as an assisted suicide?

I was somewhat surprised by the responses of individuals. Some people that I know are pro-life, anti assisted suicide, said they would want to be killed to avoid the torture.

How is this scenario any different than someone who is dying of a painful incurable disease? If someone were dying of ALS (Lou Gehrig's disease), something I have unfortunately been a witness of, and their loved one killed them, how is that any different than being burned at the stake and having a friend shoot you if they had the chance?

I would really appreciate peoples responses as this has been on my mind since that thread a year or so ago.

Thanks.
 

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
Yes, it should be legal. There is no reason to prolong someone's suffering, or guarantee them an agonizing death, if they choose to die on their own terms and in their own way.
 

Sonrise

New member
If anyone can find an instance in the bible about this....then I would consider it.

But, here is an instance concerning letting nature take it's course.

Unless a patient signs a DNR, and am speaking now of a terminally ill person, medical personnel is required to do all to keep that one alive.

DNR- do not resuscitate
 

chickenman

a-atheist
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Big CM,

That's a thought-provoking post. Could we say that the difference is: one being burned at the stake is guaranteed to die very painfully in just a minute (or a few minutes). Whereas one who is dying in a hospital bed is not in that same position?

But then, there'd be a case where a terminal patient is clearly (? seemingly ?) about to die in a moment and suffering terribly. Could he/she at that moment have an assisted suicide...and it be acceptable?

Just some rambling thoughts. CM's post has me pondering...


The other cm
 

chatmaggot

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
Big CM,

That's a thought-provoking post. Could we say that the difference is: one being burned at the stake is guaranteed to die very painfully in just a minute (or a few minutes). Whereas one who is dying in a hospital bed is not in that same position?

But then, there'd be a case where a terminal patient is clearly (? seemingly ?) about to die in a moment and suffering terribly. Could he/she at that moment have an assisted suicide...and it be acceptable?

Just some rambling thoughts. CM's post has me pondering...


The other cm

I've been pondering it for some time.

I had thought about the same thing that you mentioned. They are in different "positions". However, the outcome seems to be the same...death. One will just die sooner than the other.

Also, I found that original thread that I referred to in my post.

It is from October 15th, 2008

I have been pondering it since the original thread below:

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=52113
 

Nathon Detroit

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Big CM,

That's a thought-provoking post. Could we say that the difference is: one being burned at the stake is guaranteed to die very painfully in just a minute (or a few minutes). Whereas one who is dying in a hospital bed is not in that same position?

But then, there'd be a case where a terminal patient is clearly (? seemingly ?) about to die in a moment and suffering terribly. Could he/she at that moment have an assisted suicide...and it be acceptable?

Just some rambling thoughts. CM's post has me pondering...


The other cm
Another difference is....

In one case a person is dying of natural causes.

While the person being burned at the stake is being murdered.

You might see a similar distinction between a person committing suicide merely because they are depressed, compared to a person who commits suicide by jumping on a hand-grenade to save others.
 

Nathon Detroit

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Yes, it should be legal. There is no reason to prolong someone's suffering, or guarantee them an agonizing death, if they choose to die on their own terms and in their own way.
One problem with your assessment is often times terminally ill people who wish to have their life terminated early is, they are NOT dying on their own terms. Often times they have been slowly and carefully manipulated by friends, family, and "medical professionals" into believing they are doing the right thing. You can imagine that someone in that predicament might be easily manipulated.
 

Ecumenicist

New member
How about Theological discussions? Any scriptural references come to mind?

Jesus refused what might have been an anesthetic drink while on the cross,
but on the other hand God saw to it that Jesus died much sooner than would
normally be seen in a Crucifixion, hours rather than days of suffering.

Did God assist Jesus in dieing sooner and avoiding suffering?
 

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
One problem with your assessment is often times terminally ill people who wish to have their life terminated early is, they are NOT dying on their own terms. Often times they have been slowly and carefully manipulated by friends, family, and "medical professionals" into believing they are doing the right thing. You can imagine that someone in that predicament might be easily manipulated.

Quite true, which is why each case would need to be carefully vetted--we're talking about extraordinary circumstances and an extraordinary request. This isn't a situation where I'd want to see gold diggers pounce.
 

chatmaggot

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
Another difference is....

In one case a person is dying of natural causes.

While the person being burned at the stake is being murdered.

You might see a similar distinction between a person committing suicide merely because they are depressed, compared to a person who commits suicide by jumping on a hand-grenade to save others.

I understand the danger of saying "Yes. Assisted suicide should be legal" is that it will then be used for people who are having a bad day or for some girl who just broke up with their boyfriend and thinks it's the end of the world.

The grenade example was also brought up in the other thread that I referred to. I, like you (i think), don't believe that a sacrifice, such as the person saving people by jumping on a grenade, is in the same category as suicide. To me, sacrifice does not equal suicide.

In regards to the person being burned at the stake, I agree that it seems a little different because they are being murdered. What if instead of being burned at the stake, they had fallen off a cliff and was being attacked by a heard of animals (lions for example). You realize that you don't have enough ammo to kill all the lions, so instead you shoot the person to avoid the torture of being eaten.

Please understand Knight, I am not trying to play "what if" games even though I bring up what appear to be frivolous "what if"examples. Like I said before, I am asking because this topic has been on my mind since that thread from 2008. Having watched a family member slowly die of ALS was so painful. During that time, the discussion came up about "putting him out of his misery" and I was opposed to it.

After reading the thread from 2008 I began to wonder. That's all I am doing by asking these questions. I am wondering out loud...and not trying to be annoying my bringing up frivolous "what ifs".

Thank you.
 

Newman

New member
Quite true, which is why each case would need to be carefully vetted--we're talking about extraordinary circumstances and an extraordinary request. This isn't a situation where I'd want to see gold diggers pounce.

Yeah. Each situation is so different, that's why each case should be decided by the person suffering, either beforehand through a will, or at the time, provided that they are conscious and sane enough to make that decision.
 

Ecumenicist

New member
How about if your a Samuri committing Seppuku as an act of honor, and your best friend agrees to cut your head off to end your suffering?
 

Nathon Detroit

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
After reading the thread from 2008 I began to wonder. That's all I am doing by asking these questions. I am wondering out loud...and not trying to be annoying my bringing up frivolous "what ifs".
I hear ya.

I don't think it's always as clear cut as some might suggest.

That's why I think we need to look at it on balance. In the grand scheme of things what is the right policy to have? What policy would be appropriate for the vast majority of cases? There are always those "fringe" cases that make you go "hmmm".
 

This Charming Manc

Well-known member
There is also the thin edge of wedge argument ...... what's heavily vetted by a persons choice now, becomes everyday, casual and pressure later.

One problem with your assessment is often times terminally ill people who wish to have their life terminated early is, they are NOT dying on their own terms. Often times they have been slowly and carefully manipulated by friends, family, and "medical professionals" into believing they are doing the right thing. You can imagine that someone in that predicament might be easily manipulated.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top