Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

The Right to Die

Page 4 of 5 [ 71 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 99
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

18 Aug 2009, 11:36 pm

ruveyn wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
It is a certainty that all will die, why care to make it a "right"? Just so the time can be chosen? Can I choose other people's times also? Since that's where the fun of state run euthanasia begins.


We have a right to eat and wash when we wish to. We should be able to kill ourselves (or have someone do it for us) when we wish to. Doing things when we choose to (as long as that does not interfere with someone else doing the same) is an essential element of liberty.

We own our lives, we own our bodies, we own our time. They are not the property of society, the state, the government or of god or the gods. Period.

ruveyn


This, of course is a personal declaration with, apparently, no basis in theology since ruveyn is a declared atheist. Property, in a social environment, is established by legal documentation and traditional agreement and the state frequently decides how it should be respected or disposed whatever the wishes of the presumed owner.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 88
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

19 Aug 2009, 1:46 am

Sand wrote:

This, of course is a personal declaration with, apparently, no basis in theology since ruveyn is a declared atheist. Property, in a social environment, is established by legal documentation and traditional agreement and the state frequently decides how it should be respected or disposed whatever the wishes of the presumed owner.


The declaration is binding on any government that claims to recognize the natural rights of humans. As far as scripture goes, God only claims ten percent of produce. The rest belongs to the producer. There is no prohibition against suicide in TNCH (Hebrew Bible). And I am Jewish, not an atheist. I believe the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob was an extraterrestrial (or a group thereof) from a very advanced civilization on another planet. Read the Prophet Ezekiel and his description of a vehicle that describes very well a lander from a ship parked in orbit. Read also the departure of the "angel" that announced the birth of Sampson to the parents. It is a perfect description of a Star Trek type "beam up".

Except for the creation myth the description of the doings of God (Yaweh) in the Hebrew Scriptures in no way transcends the natural order of things.

ruveyn



iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

19 Aug 2009, 1:58 am

ruveyn wrote:
Sand wrote:

This, of course is a personal declaration with, apparently, no basis in theology since ruveyn is a declared atheist. Property, in a social environment, is established by legal documentation and traditional agreement and the state frequently decides how it should be respected or disposed whatever the wishes of the presumed owner.


The declaration is binding on any government that claims to recognize the natural rights of humans. As far as scripture goes, God only claims ten percent of produce. The rest belongs to the producer. There is no prohibition against suicide in TNCH (Hebrew Bible). And I am Jewish, not an atheist. I believe the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob was an extraterrestrial (or a group thereof) from a very advanced civilization on another planet. Read the Prophet Ezekiel and his description of a vehicle that describes very well a lander from a ship parked in orbit. Read also the departure of the "angel" that announced the birth of Sampson to the parents. It is a perfect description of a Star Trek type "beam up".

Except for the creation myth the description of the doings of God (Yaweh) in the Hebrew Scriptures in no way transcends the natural order of things.

ruveyn


Raeliens for the lose.



Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 99
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

19 Aug 2009, 2:15 am

ruveyn wrote:
Sand wrote:

This, of course is a personal declaration with, apparently, no basis in theology since ruveyn is a declared atheist. Property, in a social environment, is established by legal documentation and traditional agreement and the state frequently decides how it should be respected or disposed whatever the wishes of the presumed owner.


The declaration is binding on any government that claims to recognize the natural rights of humans. As far as scripture goes, God only claims ten percent of produce. The rest belongs to the producer. There is no prohibition against suicide in TNCH (Hebrew Bible). And I am Jewish, not an atheist. I believe the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob was an extraterrestrial (or a group thereof) from a very advanced civilization on another planet. Read the Prophet Ezekiel and his description of a vehicle that describes very well a lander from a ship parked in orbit. Read also the departure of the "angel" that announced the birth of Sampson to the parents. It is a perfect description of a Star Trek type "beam up".

Except for the creation myth the description of the doings of God (Yaweh) in the Hebrew Scriptures in no way transcends the natural order of things.

ruveyn


Goodness, ruveyn, all that crap you've been blabbering about Christians and other faiths not having a good sense of reality have been mere cover for your own particular brand of hooey. To worship Star Trek - for shame!



zer0netgain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2009
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,613

19 Aug 2009, 6:46 am

ruveyn wrote:
zer0netgain wrote:

I don't support people wanting to kill themselves (when there is nothing wrong with them). I do support people allowing themselves to die (via refusing medical care, etc.).



Who are you to judge that question? What does "nothing" wrong mean. Do you mean no obvious physiological problem, or disease, or pain? Or what? And how would you know what degree of psychological pain another human being is feeling. Are you psychic? Or are you just arrogant?

ruveyn


I am a person who was ASKED what my position was on the topic of suicide. "Nothing" means they want to kill themselves because they simply don't want to live. I could sympathize for someone in serious suffering WANTING to die, but absent such suffering, I see no basis for ending one's life. Just my position.

I think the rest of my post was self-explanatory.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 88
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

19 Aug 2009, 8:24 am

Sand wrote:

Goodness, ruveyn, all that crap you've been blabbering about Christians and other faiths not having a good sense of reality have been mere cover for your own particular brand of hooey. To worship Star Trek - for shame!


I don't believe in super-natural nonsense. Perhaps I believe natural nonsense.

The stories of Abraham and Moses having communication with beings or persons of unusual powers or abilities are too pervasive to be dismissed out of hand. Also Jewish law is too much at odds with the then prevailing Mesopotamian and Egyptian culture to have been made up by the locals out of whole cloth. I knew Jews have been and are especially talented in the areas of the intellect and ethics, but I don't believe Jews are that talented. I think they got some help.

And even with all that, during the time period from about 1200 b.c.e. to maybe 700 b.c.e. in diverse parts of the world there was a sudden intellectual awakening in China, Greece, Egypt, Mesopotamia. It could have been humans unaided, that is possible. Or it could have been contact with extra-Terrestrials violating the prime directive and influencing the earth folk. Consider European history. Our own forbears have gone to primitive parts of the world for various reasons and input and imposed own views on the locals. Nothing supernatural there. I think we have been Visited. I do not believe anything magic or contrary to the laws of physics happened then. Not then, not now.

ruveyn



Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 99
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

19 Aug 2009, 8:32 am

ruveyn wrote:
Sand wrote:

Goodness, ruveyn, all that crap you've been blabbering about Christians and other faiths not having a good sense of reality have been mere cover for your own particular brand of hooey. To worship Star Trek - for shame!


I don't believe in super-natural nonsense. Perhaps I believe natural nonsense.

The stories of Abraham and Moses having communication with beings or persons of unusual powers or abilities are too pervasive to be dismissed out of hand. Also Jewish law is too much at odds with the then prevailing Mesopotamian and Egyptian culture to have been made up by the locals out of whole cloth. I knew Jews have been and are especially talented in the areas of the intellect and ethics, but I don't believe Jews are that talented. I think they got some help.

And even with all that, during the time period from about 1200 b.c.e. to maybe 700 b.c.e. in diverse parts of the world there was a sudden intellectual awakening in China, Greece, Egypt, Mesopotamia. It could have been humans unaided, that is possible. Or it could have been contact with extra-Terrestrials violating the prime directive and influencing the earth folk. Consider European history. Our own forbears have gone to primitive parts of the world for various reasons and input and imposed own views on the locals. Nothing supernatural there. I think we have been Visited. I do not believe anything magic or contrary to the laws of physics happened then. Not then, not now.

ruveyn


There is a vague possibility of interstellar beings being around then and even now, but the possibility, as faint as it might be has no power to induce belief. No possible proof of a god's existence is around either, but belief is another thing altogether. Mr. Spock would be dismayed.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 88
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

19 Aug 2009, 9:52 am

Sand wrote:

There is a vague possibility of interstellar beings being around then and even now, but the possibility, as faint as it might be has no power to induce belief. No possible proof of a god's existence is around either, but belief is another thing altogether. Mr. Spock would be dismayed.


Indeed belief is another thing. What separates "mere" belief from hard plausibility (which is another degree of belief) is equally hard evidence. There is currently no evidence which demands that we take the notion of extra-terrestrial visits seriously. On the other hand the notion of such visits is not ipso facto absurd or contradictory. It is a logically possible explanation for the facts we do know.

Our knowledge of history is necessarily incomplete. We knows of some artifacts and writings, but they are a small subset of what actually exists or existed at one time. Short of acquiring a Time Machine (do not hold your breath for that!) or finding dynamite evidence in the basement of the Great Pyramid or underneath the Sphinx we have to settle on the most plausible theories which do not assume way too much (a variant of Occam's Razor). I do not find the assumption of Visits in our prehistoric past too much of burden. Others might disagree. YMMV. From my own experience with Jewish thinking, I find Jewish thought way out line with what we know of Egyptian and Babylonian thinking. The Visit theory seems to account for that divergence. The Chinese who were out of touch with the west until maybe 1800 years ago, also became Enlightened all of a sudden. Could be be Good Luck? Or could it be a Visit? Who knows? Evidence is very sparse.

ruveyn



Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 99
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

19 Aug 2009, 11:05 am

ruveyn wrote:
Sand wrote:

There is a vague possibility of interstellar beings being around then and even now, but the possibility, as faint as it might be has no power to induce belief. No possible proof of a god's existence is around either, but belief is another thing altogether. Mr. Spock would be dismayed.


Indeed belief is another thing. What separates "mere" belief from hard plausibility (which is another degree of belief) is equally hard evidence. There is currently no evidence which demands that we take the notion of extra-terrestrial visits seriously. On the other hand the notion of such visits is not ipso facto absurd or contradictory. It is a logically possible explanation for the facts we do know.

Our knowledge of history is necessarily incomplete. We knows of some artifacts and writings, but they are a small subset of what actually exists or existed at one time. Short of acquiring a Time Machine (do not hold your breath for that!) or finding dynamite evidence in the basement of the Great Pyramid or underneath the Sphinx we have to settle on the most plausible theories which do not assume way too much (a variant of Occam's Razor). I do not find the assumption of Visits in our prehistoric past too much of burden. Others might disagree. YMMV. From my own experience with Jewish thinking, I find Jewish thought way out line with what we know of Egyptian and Babylonian thinking. The Visit theory seems to account for that divergence. The Chinese who were out of touch with the west until maybe 1800 years ago, also became Enlightened all of a sudden. Could be be Good Luck? Or could it be a Visit? Who knows? Evidence is very sparse.

ruveyn


As someone with Jewish ancestry through both my parents I am well aware of the Jewish people 's insistent claim of being chosen. I do not deny the strong traditions of profound scholarship and the many intellectual accomplishments of the culture but it annoys me that it is so similar to the claims of the Nazis of some sort of genetic superiority(with a great deal less evidence) and it seems so much a compensation for the frightful treatment the Jews have been accorded through the centuries despite the fact that both Christianity and Islam have fundamental roots in the Jewish religion. Sociologically that might derive from the genetic disposition of progeny to revolt against their parents to enable them to become independent. But to psychologically twist the ancient principle of "chosen by God" to "chosen by an interstellar visitor" seems to me to be obviously an adolescent concept of trying to give realistic grounds to a cultural egotism. It simply doesn't work for me. I am sufficiently satisfied with my status of a human who has certain limited capabilities derived from no more than his psychology, physiology and experience and it needs no further propping up. From what you have spoken of yourself, aside from your immensely callous attitudes towards your fellow humans, you have nothing to be ashamed of and also need no artificial props.



b9
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Aug 2008
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,003
Location: australia

19 Aug 2009, 12:26 pm

suicide is a very bad thing. i think it is illegal.
anyone who attempts suicide should be sentenced to death.
maybe that would send a message to people who wish to commit suicide. "they will not get away with it with their life".



0_equals_true
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2007
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,038
Location: London

19 Aug 2009, 12:35 pm

Read this thread for my view
http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt99966.html



rensilaer
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 29 Jul 2009
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 86
Location: San Francisco

19 Aug 2009, 12:55 pm

b9 wrote:
suicide is a very bad thing. i think it is illegal.
anyone who attempts suicide should be sentenced to death.
maybe that would send a message to people who wish to commit suicide. "they will not get away with it with their life".


That is some exceptionally dry humor there. :)



Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 99
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

19 Aug 2009, 12:57 pm

rensilaer wrote:
b9 wrote:
suicide is a very bad thing. i think it is illegal.
anyone who attempts suicide should be sentenced to death.
maybe that would send a message to people who wish to commit suicide. "they will not get away with it with their life".


That is some exceptionally dry humor there. :)


It's so dry it's flakey.



gina-ghettoprincess
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Nov 2008
Age: 29
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,669
Location: The Town That Time Forgot (UK)

19 Aug 2009, 1:21 pm

My grandfather (who was a well-respected vicar in the Church of England) had two strokes in the same week (this was nearly three years ago), and was half-paralysed. After the first one, he chose not to be resuscitated if it happened again, because he felt it would be somewhat pointless to stay alive and suffer. So he died, but at least now he's at peace. I think others should also be at liberty to make this decision for themselves.

I think I read something in the paper recently saying that the Catholic Church has relaxed its stance on suicide. I'll try and find the article.


_________________
'El reloj, no avanza
y yo quiero ir a verte,
La clase, no acaba
y es como un semestre"


zer0netgain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2009
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,613

19 Aug 2009, 1:38 pm

gina-ghettoprincess wrote:
My grandfather (who was a well-respected vicar in the Church of England) had two strokes in the same week (this was nearly three years ago), and was half-paralysed. After the first one, he chose not to be resuscitated if it happened again, because he felt it would be somewhat pointless to stay alive and suffer. So he died, but at least now he's at peace. I think others should also be at liberty to make this decision for themselves.

I think I read something in the paper recently saying that the Catholic Church has relaxed its stance on suicide. I'll try and find the article.


Most places I know permit a person to refuse medical care and the create DNR (Do Not Resuscitate) orders to inform medical personnel of their wish to be allowed to die.

There is a vast difference between choosing to allow nature to take it's course and forcing it to happen where it would not have otherwise happened.



rensilaer
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 29 Jul 2009
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 86
Location: San Francisco

21 Aug 2009, 12:18 pm

zer0netgain wrote:
gina-ghettoprincess wrote:
My grandfather (who was a well-respected vicar in the Church of England) had two strokes in the same week (this was nearly three years ago), and was half-paralysed. After the first one, he chose not to be resuscitated if it happened again, because he felt it would be somewhat pointless to stay alive and suffer. So he died, but at least now he's at peace. I think others should also be at liberty to make this decision for themselves.

I think I read something in the paper recently saying that the Catholic Church has relaxed its stance on suicide. I'll try and find the article.


Most places I know permit a person to refuse medical care and the create DNR (Do Not Resuscitate) orders to inform medical personnel of their wish to be allowed to die.

There is a vast difference between choosing to allow nature to take it's course and forcing it to happen where it would not have otherwise happened.


What about people who are doomed to live in excrutiating, soul-defeating pain who aren't strictly going to die soon. I have a DNR on record that my parents know about that I made when I was 20 saying that if my life is in peril, no extraordinary measures are to be made and that if it looks as though I will be a para or quadropeligic, to simply let me die. Life shouldn't be forced on someone who simply doesn't want to be in pain anymore.