| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Mike Painter" |
| Date: |
04 Jul 2004 12:11:47 AM |
| Object: |
OT Life. Quality vs Quantity |
Some studies indicate people in religious environments live longer.
Tonight a friend stopped by to get some checks signed and she started
talking about her father. He was given 6 months to live about 2.5 years ago.
He moved in with his daughter rather than go to a hospice and she has been
caring for him.
Once a *very* active man he can't drive any more and a walk of a few feet on
O2 leaves him out of breath. There is a DNR in place and we, the people who
will get there first know about it.
If you've ever had asthma you know the feeling and how horrible it is to not
be able to breath.
I wonder if these people are just alive longer because people will not let
them stop suffering. They stopped living when they got sick.
.
|
|
| User: "Ichimusai" |
|
| Title: Re: OT Life. Quality vs Quantity |
04 Jul 2004 08:02:32 AM |
|
|
"Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> writes:
I wonder if these people are just alive longer because people will not let
them stop suffering. They stopped living when they got sick.
Well, even if astma is not very nice, I am not really prepared to
execute people with that diagnosis just right now.
--
Ichimusai http://ichimusai.org/ AA #769 ICQ: 1645566 Yahoo: Ichimusai
MSN: Ichimusai1972 AOL: Ichimusai1972 IRC: Ichimusai@IRCNet
15:01:01 up 21:49, 4 users, load average: 2.51, 1.64, 1.21
The computer doesn't want any beer, no matter how much you think it
does. NEVER, EVER feed your computer beer.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "DianaC" |
|
| Title: Re: OT Life. Quality vs Quantity |
04 Jul 2004 08:01:02 AM |
|
|
"Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:nkMFc.10760$u16.9870@newssvr27.news.prodigy.com...
Some studies indicate people in religious environments live longer.
Tonight a friend stopped by to get some checks signed and she started
talking about her father. He was given 6 months to live about 2.5 years
ago.
He moved in with his daughter rather than go to a hospice and she has been
caring for him.
Once a *very* active man he can't drive any more and a walk of a few feet
on
O2 leaves him out of breath. There is a DNR in place and we, the people
who
will get there first know about it.
If you've ever had asthma you know the feeling and how horrible it is to
not
be able to breath.
I know the feeling quite well.
I wonder if these people are just alive longer because people will not let
them stop suffering. They stopped living when they got sick.
There is a DNR in place. Therefore his wishes are known. Why don't you ask
the PATIENT if he wants you to kill him now?
Or are you one of those people who think that YOU know better than he does
when life is no longer worth living?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Enkidu" |
|
| Title: Re: OT Life. Quality vs Quantity |
04 Jul 2004 12:24:21 AM |
|
|
In article <nkMFc.10760$u16.9870@newssvr27.news.prodigy.com>,
mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net says...
Some studies indicate people in religious environments live longer.
It just seems longer. Ever sit through a Sunday sermon? That alone
feels like a week.
Tonight a friend stopped by to get some checks signed and she started
talking about her father. He was given 6 months to live about 2.5 years ago.
He moved in with his daughter rather than go to a hospice and she has been
caring for him.
I've had experience with San Diego Hospice. It was a mistake not to
have called them sooner. Good people when we needed them.
Once a *very* active man he can't drive any more and a walk of a few feet on
O2 leaves him out of breath. There is a DNR in place and we, the people who
will get there first know about it.
If you've ever had asthma you know the feeling and how horrible it is to not
be able to breath.
I wonder if these people are just alive longer because people will not let
them stop suffering. They stopped living when they got sick.
Every sperm is sacred, every agonizing breath a gift from God. Execute
a prisoner without a second thought, though.
--
Enkidu - AA# 2165
EAC Plant Psychologist
"Today, the theory of evolution is an accepted fact for
everyone but a fundamentalist minority, whose objections
are based not on reasoning but on doctrinaire adherence
to religious principles"
James D. Watson
http://www.nobel.se/medicine/laureates/1962/watson-bio.html
"The Astonishing Hypothesis is that `You,' your joys and
your sorrows, your memories and your ambitions, your
sense of personal identity and free will, are in fact no
more than the behavior of a vast assembly of nerve cells
and their associated molecules."
Francis Crick
http://www.nobel.se/medicine/laureates/1962/crick-bio.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "DianaC" |
|
| Title: Re: OT Life. Quality vs Quantity |
04 Jul 2004 08:12:05 AM |
|
|
"Enkidu" <enkidu@leaddogs.org> wrote in message
news:MPG.1b51345fcd1516839898b4@news.west.cox.net...
In article <nkMFc.10760$u16.9870@newssvr27.news.prodigy.com>,
mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net says...
Some studies indicate people in religious environments live longer.
It just seems longer. Ever sit through a Sunday sermon? That alone
feels like a week.
Tonight a friend stopped by to get some checks signed and she started
talking about her father. He was given 6 months to live about 2.5 years
ago.
He moved in with his daughter rather than go to a hospice and she has
been
caring for him.
I've had experience with San Diego Hospice. It was a mistake not to
have called them sooner. Good people when we needed them.
Yes. I have had experience with Hospice care. It was wonderful.
Once a *very* active man he can't drive any more and a walk of a few
feet on
O2 leaves him out of breath. There is a DNR in place and we, the people
who
will get there first know about it.
If you've ever had asthma you know the feeling and how horrible it is to
not
be able to breath.
I wonder if these people are just alive longer because people will not
let
them stop suffering. They stopped living when they got sick.
Every sperm is sacred, every agonizing breath a gift from God. Execute
a prisoner without a second thought, though.
And if the man struggling to breathe is the one who WANTS to keep
struggling? Is it YOUR choice to decide when his quality if life is just too
poor to continue? There is a DNR in place. His wishes are known.
Or do you think you know better than the patient's family...and more
specifically, the patient, whether living or dying is a good thing?
Just lately...the last two years, in fact, my quality of life has by your
standards, sucked. I could hardly walk. I was in constant pain, moving
across the room was agony. But I dealt with it because *I* found life worth
living.
At the same time, I was having asthma attacks that made it very difficult to
breathe or get out and do anything. But I dealt with it because *I* found
life worth living.
But the solution, putting in a new knee, hasn't been any picnic. I reacted
badly to the anesthesia and pain meds, have now lost 20 pounds because I
could not keep anything down, my knee and leg feel like someone had cut into
it, cut off the ends of the bones and hammered steel spikes into what was
left of them. Which is what they did, as a matter of fact. It hurts.
But I am dealing with it because *I* find life still worth living.
In my case, I expect my new knee to make living much better; medications for
asthma are dealing with that issue. But I am 54 years old and I'm not going
to get younger. There may well come a time when I personally will not find
life worth living, and at that time, *I* may do something about it. But if
people like you think that you have the right to tell me when my life sucks
too much, and figure you have the right to 'put me out of my misery', (or
simply withhold treatment so that I don't get what I need to live) then....
go diddle yourself in the middle of a freeway 'cause that simply is NOT your
call. It's mine.
And it is that of the patient in question HERE, too. He has a DNR. He knows
what he wants. Let him alone.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Painter" |
|
| Title: Re: OT Life. Quality vs Quantity |
04 Jul 2004 11:15:01 AM |
|
|
"DianaC" <dianaiad@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:FmTFc.11158$6e7.7188@nwrddc03.gnilink.net...
Some studies indicate people in religious environments live longer.
It just seems longer. Ever sit through a Sunday sermon? That alone
feels like a week.
Tonight a friend stopped by to get some checks signed and she started
talking about her father. He was given 6 months to live about 2.5
years
ago.
He moved in with his daughter rather than go to a hospice and she has
been
caring for him.
And if the man struggling to breathe is the one who WANTS to keep
struggling? Is it YOUR choice to decide when his quality if life is just
too
poor to continue? There is a DNR in place. His wishes are known.
Or do you think you know better than the patient's family...and more
specifically, the patient, whether living or dying is a good thing?
It's got nothing to do with what I think. I'm reporting what I was told by
the daughter who brought him home.
His daughter does not want the man to suffer. He is not going to get well.
The doctor has suggested he enter a hospice where he will probably not live
much longer.
He constantly tells people not to resusicatate if *anything* happens to him.
If he lived in a state where assisted sucicide were legal he wouold probably
take advantage of it.
<snip>
sob story cut.
.
|
|
|
| User: "DianaC" |
|
| Title: Re: OT Life. Quality vs Quantity |
04 Jul 2004 12:17:12 PM |
|
|
"Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:92WFc.6182$vf4.5565@newssvr25.news.prodigy.com...
<snip to>
It's got nothing to do with what I think. I'm reporting what I was told by
the daughter who brought him home.
So the family that you are blaming for making him continue to suffer is
actually concerned about this issue and wants the best for him, even if that
'best' is to let him go?
His daughter does not want the man to suffer.
So why are you railing against his horrible family for keeping him around,
this awful theists who are torturing him? Sounds to me that...according to
his family, the people who told YOU about him, that they just want what is
best for him, and that 'best' is a lack of suffering.
He is not going to get well.
The doctor has suggested he enter a hospice where he will probably not
live
much longer.
He constantly tells people not to resusicatate if *anything* happens to
him.
If he lived in a state where assisted sucicide were legal he wouold
probably
take advantage of it.
<snip specious and rather stupid remark about my own experiences>
May you have a very long life and the will to live it, and may your
caretakers all be just like you.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Enkidu" |
|
| Title: Re: OT Life. Quality vs Quantity |
04 Jul 2004 09:54:26 AM |
|
|
In article <FmTFc.11158$6e7.7188@nwrddc03.gnilink.net>,
dianaiad@verizon.net says...
"Enkidu" <enkidu@leaddogs.org> wrote in message
news:MPG.1b51345fcd1516839898b4@news.west.cox.net...
In article <nkMFc.10760$u16.9870@newssvr27.news.prodigy.com>,
mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net says...
Some studies indicate people in religious environments live longer.
It just seems longer. Ever sit through a Sunday sermon? That alone
feels like a week.
Tonight a friend stopped by to get some checks signed and she started
talking about her father. He was given 6 months to live about 2.5 years
ago.
He moved in with his daughter rather than go to a hospice and she has
been
caring for him.
I've had experience with San Diego Hospice. It was a mistake not to
have called them sooner. Good people when we needed them.
Yes. I have had experience with Hospice care. It was wonderful.
Once a *very* active man he can't drive any more and a walk of a few
feet on
O2 leaves him out of breath. There is a DNR in place and we, the people
who
will get there first know about it.
If you've ever had asthma you know the feeling and how horrible it is to
not
be able to breath.
I wonder if these people are just alive longer because people will not
let
them stop suffering. They stopped living when they got sick.
Every sperm is sacred, every agonizing breath a gift from God. Execute
a prisoner without a second thought, though.
And if the man struggling to breathe is the one who WANTS to keep
struggling? Is it YOUR choice to decide when his quality if life is just too
poor to continue? There is a DNR in place. His wishes are known.
Or do you think you know better than the patient's family...and more
specifically, the patient, whether living or dying is a good thing?
Not at all. I do know that in California, it is illegal to assist him
in passing away, should *he* ask. It's a sad comment that a DNR is as
far as we are willing to go to assist one in this situation.
Just lately...the last two years, in fact, my quality of life has by your
standards, sucked. I could hardly walk. I was in constant pain, moving
across the room was agony. But I dealt with it because *I* found life worth
living.
At the same time, I was having asthma attacks that made it very difficult to
breathe or get out and do anything. But I dealt with it because *I* found
life worth living.
And that is your choice, nobody else's. Being younger and otherwise
healthy, with family to depend on and who depend on you, with possible
treatments aments that might improve your situation, you would have been
foolish to opt out.
But the solution, putting in a new knee, hasn't been any picnic. I reacted
badly to the anesthesia and pain meds, have now lost 20 pounds because I
could not keep anything down, my knee and leg feel like someone had cut into
it, cut off the ends of the bones and hammered steel spikes into what was
left of them. Which is what they did, as a matter of fact. It hurts.
But I am dealing with it because *I* find life still worth living.
In my case, I expect my new knee to make living much better; medications for
asthma are dealing with that issue. But I am 54 years old and I'm not going
to get younger. There may well come a time when I personally will not find
life worth living, and at that time, *I* may do something about it. But if
people like you think that you have the right to tell me when my life sucks
too much, and figure you have the right to 'put me out of my misery', (or
simply withhold treatment so that I don't get what I need to live) then....
I NEVER said such a thing!
go diddle yourself in the middle of a freeway 'cause that simply is NOT your
call. It's mine.
I NEVER said it was my call. Only that it is shameful that our society
forces suffering on the terminally ill in the name of "life" but
supports the death penalty.
The terminally ill have no right to decide this question for themselves.
Who are WE to decide that life is ALWAYS worth living? Isn't that
nearly as bad as *us* deciding when it isn't for someone else?
And it is that of the patient in question HERE, too. He has a DNR. He knows
what he wants. Let him alone.
I was not referring to this patient alone, but to a group who claims
every life is precieious on the one hand, yet pushes capital punishment
on the other.
You got my point completely wrong.
--
Enkidu - AA# 2165
EAC Plant Psychologist
"Today, the theory of evolution is an accepted fact for
everyone but a fundamentalist minority, whose objections
are based not on reasoning but on doctrinaire adherence
to religious principles"
James D. Watson
http://www.nobel.se/medicine/laureates/1962/watson-bio.html
"The Astonishing Hypothesis is that `You,' your joys and
your sorrows, your memories and your ambitions, your
sense of personal identity and free will, are in fact no
more than the behavior of a vast assembly of nerve cells
and their associated molecules."
Francis Crick
http://www.nobel.se/medicine/laureates/1962/crick-bio.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "DianaC" |
|
| Title: Re: OT Life. Quality vs Quantity |
04 Jul 2004 10:25:19 AM |
|
|
"Enkidu" <enkidu@leaddogs.org> wrote in message
news:MPG.1b51b9e34e4729749898bc@news.west.cox.net...
In article <FmTFc.11158$6e7.7188@nwrddc03.gnilink.net>,
dianaiad@verizon.net says...
<snip to>
In my case, I expect my new knee to make living much better; medications
for
asthma are dealing with that issue. But I am 54 years old and I'm not
going
to get younger. There may well come a time when I personally will not
find
life worth living, and at that time, *I* may do something about it. But
if
people like you think that you have the right to tell me when my life
sucks
too much, and figure you have the right to 'put me out of my misery',
(or
simply withhold treatment so that I don't get what I need to live)
then....
I NEVER said such a thing!
OK, then you have my apologies. However, the first poster to this
thread..Mike Painter, is it? ..seemed to assume that the choice of life was
some evil theist plot to keep the patient in misery. He didn't give much
room for the idea that the PATIENT has a choice in this. Or that the PATIENT
should have the final say, either way.
go diddle yourself in the middle of a freeway 'cause that simply is NOT
your
call. It's mine.
I NEVER said it was my call. Only that it is shameful that our society
forces suffering on the terminally ill in the name of "life" but
supports the death penalty.
I find it equally shameful that opponents of the death penalty for crimes of
the most heinous and murderous intent feel that it's perfectly fine to kill
innocents whose only crime is inconvenience. At least pro-life, pro-death
penalty people figure that one should actually DO something to deserve the
death penalty, not just 'happen to be'.
The terminally ill have no right to decide this question for themselves.
Who are WE to decide that life is ALWAYS worth living? Isn't that
nearly as bad as *us* deciding when it isn't for someone else?
And it is that of the patient in question HERE, too. He has a DNR. He
knows
what he wants. Let him alone.
I was not referring to this patient alone, but to a group who claims
every life is precieious on the one hand, yet pushes capital punishment
on the other.
You got my point completely wrong.
Well, MOSTLY wrong, it looks like...sorry about that. HOwever, the statement
about 'not referring to this paitient ALONE..." made me think that you were
buying into Painter's assumption that OF COURSE the patient would rather be
dead but his family is keeping him breathing against his will, a wee little
bit.
DianaC
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Stahl" |
|
| Title: Re: OT Life. Quality vs Quantity |
05 Jul 2004 10:52:10 AM |
|
|
"DianaC" <dianaiad@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:zjVFc.6224$Xq4.4086@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
"Enkidu" <enkidu@leaddogs.org> wrote in message
news:MPG.1b51b9e34e4729749898bc@news.west.cox.net...
In article <FmTFc.11158$6e7.7188@nwrddc03.gnilink.net>,
dianaiad@verizon.net says...
<snip to>
In my case, I expect my new knee to make living much better;
medications
for
asthma are dealing with that issue. But I am 54 years old and I'm not
going
to get younger. There may well come a time when I personally will not
find
life worth living, and at that time, *I* may do something about it.
But
if
people like you think that you have the right to tell me when my life
sucks
too much, and figure you have the right to 'put me out of my misery',
(or
simply withhold treatment so that I don't get what I need to live)
then....
I NEVER said such a thing!
OK, then you have my apologies. However, the first poster to this
thread..Mike Painter, is it? ..seemed to assume that the choice of life
was
some evil theist plot to keep the patient in misery. He didn't give much
room for the idea that the PATIENT has a choice in this. Or that the
PATIENT
should have the final say, either way.
go diddle yourself in the middle of a freeway 'cause that simply is
NOT
your
call. It's mine.
I NEVER said it was my call. Only that it is shameful that our society
forces suffering on the terminally ill in the name of "life" but
supports the death penalty.
I find it equally shameful that opponents of the death penalty for crimes
of
the most heinous and murderous intent feel that it's perfectly fine to
kill
innocents whose only crime is inconvenience.
what on earth are you talking about? who feels it's "perfectly fine to kill
innocents"??
seems like all those meds you're on are having some side effects....
At least pro-life, pro-death
penalty people figure that one should actually DO something to deserve the
death penalty, not just 'happen to be'.
um, ok. whatever. you're making absolutely no sense, but, whatever.
.
|
|
|
| User: "DianaC" |
|
| Title: Re: OT Life. Quality vs Quantity |
05 Jul 2004 12:38:25 PM |
|
|
"Mark Stahl" <stahl@nospam_aecom.yu.edu> wrote in message <snip to>
I find it equally shameful that opponents of the death penalty for
crimes
of
the most heinous and murderous intent feel that it's perfectly fine to
kill
innocents whose only crime is inconvenience.
what on earth are you talking about? who feels it's "perfectly fine to
kill
innocents"??
Is there any form of life on the planet MORE innocent than an unborn child?
seems like all those meds you're on are having some side effects....
Seems like you aren't paying a whole lot of attention to what's being said.
At least pro-life, pro-death
penalty people figure that one should actually DO something to deserve
the
death penalty, not just 'happen to be'.
um, ok. whatever. you're making absolutely no sense, but, whatever.
Then listen up. I'll attempt to put it more succinctly:
Pro-lifers are being criticised for being anti-abortion at the same time
they are for the death penalty.
I find it just as ironic that pro-abortionists who are against the death
penalty seem to feel that it is WRONG to take a life even when that life is
responsible for the taking of others...perhaps many others...and yet feel
quite comfortable with ending lives for nothing more than the crime of
existing; being inconvenient, being alive.
If we are comparing ironies, I just thought I would point that out. At least
the pro-death penalty/pro-life people think you actually have to DO
something to earn the death penalty...Just existing (and that through no
fault of their own) doesn't qualify.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Stahl" |
|
| Title: Re: OT Life. Quality vs Quantity |
05 Jul 2004 08:18:30 PM |
|
|
"DianaC" <dianaiad@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:lmgGc.20638$6e7.16847@nwrddc03.gnilink.net...
"Mark Stahl" <stahl@nospam_aecom.yu.edu> wrote in message <snip to>
I find it equally shameful that opponents of the death penalty for
crimes
of
the most heinous and murderous intent feel that it's perfectly fine to
kill
innocents whose only crime is inconvenience.
what on earth are you talking about? who feels it's "perfectly fine to
kill
innocents"??
Is there any form of life on the planet MORE innocent than an unborn
child?
maybe not. what does that have to do with anyone feeling it's "perfectly
fine to kill innocents"?
seems like all those meds you're on are having some side effects....
Seems like you aren't paying a whole lot of attention to what's being
said.
unfortunately i am paying all too much attention.
At least pro-life, pro-death
penalty people figure that one should actually DO something to deserve
the
death penalty, not just 'happen to be'.
um, ok. whatever. you're making absolutely no sense, but, whatever.
Then listen up. I'll attempt to put it more succinctly:
Pro-lifers are being criticised for being anti-abortion at the same time
they are for the death penalty.
yes, and rightly so since it's a really bizarre position to take and call
yourself "pro life".
I find it just as ironic that pro-abortionists who are against the death
penalty seem to feel that it is WRONG to take a life even when that life
is
responsible for the taking of others...perhaps many others...
sure. not only is killing people wrong, but the death penalty is applied in
manifestly and demonstrably unfair ways. makes perfect sense.
and yet feel
quite comfortable with ending lives for nothing more than the crime of
existing; being inconvenient, being alive.
still you make no sense at all.
abortion has nothing to do with "ending a life".
If we are comparing ironies, I just thought I would point that out.
yes, it is very ironic that some folks cannot distinguish a human being from
an undifferentiated group of cells lacking any of the rudimentary qualities
that make one a person. ironic indeed. and weird. presumably these are the
same people who look at an oak tree and an acorn and see the same thing.
At least
the pro-death penalty/pro-life people think you actually have to DO
something to earn the death penalty
how nice for them. too bad it so often seems to work out that death
sentences are handed out to people who *haven't* done what they were
supposed to have done, or who did things that didn't earn other people death
sentences....
...Just existing (and that through no
fault of their own) doesn't qualify.
obviously. i have never heard of anyone who thought that "just existing" was
a reason for getting the death penalty. strange that you claim to have. who
are they?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Painter" |
|
| Title: Re: OT Life. Quality vs Quantity |
04 Jul 2004 11:18:09 AM |
|
|
"DianaC" <dianaiad@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:zjVFc.6224$Xq4.4086@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
"Enkidu" <enkidu@leaddogs.org> wrote in message
news:MPG.1b51b9e34e4729749898bc@news.west.cox.net...
In article <FmTFc.11158$6e7.7188@nwrddc03.gnilink.net>,
dianaiad@verizon.net says...
<snip to>
OK, then you have my apologies. However, the first poster to this
thread..Mike Painter, is it? ..seemed to assume that the choice of life
was
some evil theist plot to keep the patient in misery. He didn't give much
room for the idea that the PATIENT has a choice in this. Or that the
PATIENT
should have the final say, either way.
<snip>
Well, MOSTLY wrong, it looks like...sorry about that. HOwever, the
statement
about 'not referring to this paitient ALONE..." made me think that you
were
buying into Painter's assumption that OF COURSE the patient would rather
be
dead but his family is keeping him breathing against his will, a wee
little
bit.
You need to read what I said, not what you thought I said.
.
|
|
|
| User: "DianaC" |
|
| Title: Re: OT Life. Quality vs Quantity |
04 Jul 2004 12:17:11 PM |
|
|
"Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:55WFc.6183$Yf4.4349@newssvr25.news.prodigy.com...
"DianaC" <dianaiad@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:zjVFc.6224$Xq4.4086@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
"Enkidu" <enkidu@leaddogs.org> wrote in message
news:MPG.1b51b9e34e4729749898bc@news.west.cox.net...
In article <FmTFc.11158$6e7.7188@nwrddc03.gnilink.net>,
dianaiad@verizon.net says...
<snip to>
OK, then you have my apologies. However, the first poster to this
thread..Mike Painter, is it? ..seemed to assume that the choice of life
was
some evil theist plot to keep the patient in misery. He didn't give much
room for the idea that the PATIENT has a choice in this. Or that the
PATIENT
should have the final say, either way.
<snip>
Well, MOSTLY wrong, it looks like...sorry about that. HOwever, the
statement
about 'not referring to this paitient ALONE..." made me think that you
were
buying into Painter's assumption that OF COURSE the patient would rather
be
dead but his family is keeping him breathing against his will, a wee
little
bit.
You need to read what I said, not what you thought I said.
I did. That's what I reacted to; what you said. You SAID:
"I wonder if these people are just alive longer because people will not let
them stop suffering. They stopped living when they got sick."
These people are 'just alive longer' because 'people' (his family, the
theists) will not let them stop suffering. They stopped living when they got
sick".
you didn't leave ANY room for the patient. He may think he's living. Not
perfectly, not well, but it's HIS call.
And I do NOT want to be told that I have stopped living when I become ill.
How the hell would YOU know when *I* stop living, anyway? How do you know
that the patient you refer to has 'stopped living'? Have you asked HIM?
Your post seemed, to me, to treat him as an inconvenient object with no
thoughts or opinions of his own. After all, according to you, he's dead
already.
So yeah. I read what you wrote. If that's not what you wrote, then you
should have written better.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Enkidu" |
|
| Title: Re: OT Life. Quality vs Quantity |
04 Jul 2004 11:05:57 AM |
|
|
In article <zjVFc.6224$Xq4.4086@nwrddc02.gnilink.net>,
dianaiad@verizon.net says...
[snip]
OK, then you have my apologies. However, the first poster to this
thread..Mike Painter, is it? ..seemed to assume that the choice of life was
some evil theist plot to keep the patient in misery. He didn't give much
room for the idea that the PATIENT has a choice in this. Or that the PATIENT
should have the final say, either way.
I didn't read that into his post, but I also can't know what he thinks.
It is certainly true that all serious opposition to allowing assisted
suicide is from religious zealots who would force their view on all of
us. That these same zealots find every life so precious that they would
ban abortion, yep support capital punishment is as hypocritical as can
be.
Should a man or woman find a pain-filled existence empty of meaning,
they have little option but to suffer. There person who lived the life
and will experience the death should have the first, last and only word.
go diddle yourself in the middle of a freeway 'cause that simply is NOT
your
call. It's mine.
I NEVER said it was my call. Only that it is shameful that our society
forces suffering on the terminally ill in the name of "life" but
supports the death penalty.
I find it equally shameful that opponents of the death penalty for crimes of
the most heinous and murderous intent feel that it's perfectly fine to kill
innocents whose only crime is inconvenience. At least pro-life, pro-death
penalty people figure that one should actually DO something to deserve the
death penalty, not just 'happen to be'.
Unfortunately, the "something" that they did often included being born
black, or even being innocent. Properly applied, I don't have a problem
with early abortion or with the death penalty. I have several problems
with the death penalty as it has been carried out in the US, and I
disagree with late term abortions. And why is the religious right
against "morning after" pills? Pills that prevent pregnancy?
The terminally ill have no right to decide this question for themselves.
Who are WE to decide that life is ALWAYS worth living? Isn't that
nearly as bad as *us* deciding when it isn't for someone else?
And it is that of the patient in question HERE, too. He has a DNR. He
knows
what he wants. Let him alone.
I was not referring to this patient alone, but to a group who claims
every life is precieious on the one hand, yet pushes capital punishment
on the other.
You got my point completely wrong.
Well, MOSTLY wrong, it looks like...sorry about that. HOwever, the statement
about 'not referring to this paitient ALONE..." made me think that you were
buying into Painter's assumption that OF COURSE the patient would rather be
dead but his family is keeping him breathing against his will, a wee little
bit.
No, I jumped from the specific case to the general without warning.
--
Enkidu - AA# 2165
EAC Plant Psychologist
"Today, the theory of evolution is an accepted fact for
everyone but a fundamentalist minority, whose objections
are based not on reasoning but on doctrinaire adherence
to religious principles"
James D. Watson
http://www.nobel.se/medicine/laureates/1962/watson-bio.html
"The Astonishing Hypothesis is that `You,' your joys and
your sorrows, your memories and your ambitions, your
sense of personal identity and free will, are in fact no
more than the behavior of a vast assembly of nerve cells
and their associated molecules."
Francis Crick
http://www.nobel.se/medicine/laureates/1962/crick-bio.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "DianaC" |
|
| Title: Re: OT Life. Quality vs Quantity |
04 Jul 2004 12:04:45 PM |
|
|
"Enkidu" <enkidu@leaddogs.org> wrote in message
news:MPG.1b51cac2817a3179898be@news.west.cox.net...
In article <zjVFc.6224$Xq4.4086@nwrddc02.gnilink.net>,
dianaiad@verizon.net says...
[snip]
OK, then you have my apologies. However, the first poster to this
thread..Mike Painter, is it? ..seemed to assume that the choice of life
was
some evil theist plot to keep the patient in misery. He didn't give much
room for the idea that the PATIENT has a choice in this. Or that the
PATIENT
should have the final say, either way.
I didn't read that into his post, but I also can't know what he thinks.
It is certainly true that all serious opposition to allowing assisted
suicide is from religious zealots who would force their view on all of
us. That these same zealots find every life so precious that they would
ban abortion, yep support capital punishment is as hypocritical as can
be.
Should a man or woman find a pain-filled existence empty of meaning,
they have little option but to suffer. There person who lived the life
and will experience the death should have the first, last and only word.
go diddle yourself in the middle of a freeway 'cause that simply is
NOT
your
call. It's mine.
I NEVER said it was my call. Only that it is shameful that our
society
forces suffering on the terminally ill in the name of "life" but
supports the death penalty.
I find it equally shameful that opponents of the death penalty for
crimes of
the most heinous and murderous intent feel that it's perfectly fine to
kill
innocents whose only crime is inconvenience. At least pro-life,
pro-death
penalty people figure that one should actually DO something to deserve
the
death penalty, not just 'happen to be'.
Unfortunately, the "something" that they did often included being born
black, or even being innocent. Properly applied, I don't have a problem
with early abortion or with the death penalty. I have several problems
with the death penalty as it has been carried out in the US, and I
disagree with late term abortions. And why is the religious right
against "morning after" pills? Pills that prevent pregnancy?
I have no idea. I'm about as 'pro-life' as you can get...I made the decision
a long time ago that I wouldn't get an abortion for anything short of my own
probable death or the impossibility of viability of the child...but the
'morning after' pill sounds like a good idea to me. I can only consider that
these people count the beginning of life at conception. Given this, then the
'morning after' pill, (at least one formulation of it) interferes after
conception, it's just an extremely early form of abortion. I understand,
however, that at least one formulation, if taken early enough, prevents
conception. I personally have no problem with that one.
The terminally ill have no right to decide this question for
themselves.
Who are WE to decide that life is ALWAYS worth living? Isn't that
nearly as bad as *us* deciding when it isn't for someone else?
And it is that of the patient in question HERE, too. He has a DNR.
He
knows
what he wants. Let him alone.
I was not referring to this patient alone, but to a group who claims
every life is precieious on the one hand, yet pushes capital
punishment
on the other.
You got my point completely wrong.
Well, MOSTLY wrong, it looks like...sorry about that. HOwever, the
statement
about 'not referring to this paitient ALONE..." made me think that you
were
buying into Painter's assumption that OF COURSE the patient would rather
be
dead but his family is keeping him breathing against his will, a wee
little
bit.
No, I jumped from the specific case to the general without warning.
OK, then it was all wrong....my apologies.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
