Started By
Message

re: Is there a path to moral assisted suicide?

Posted on 12/18/22 at 1:46 pm to
Posted by CC
Galveztown
Member since Feb 2004
15251 posts
Posted on 12/18/22 at 1:46 pm to
quote:

agree with most of what you say....the problem is, people will take advantage of the law and terminate unhappy people, injured people, etc.... It will end up nasty, I promise.
And then theyll begin to advertise for it and eventually it will become the only moral choice.
Posted by FooManChoo
Member since Dec 2012
47478 posts
Posted on 12/19/22 at 10:57 am to
quote:

Good thing we're a Republic and not a Theocracy.
I don't think you know what a Theocracy actually is. A nation doesn't have to be a Theocracy to recognize Jesus Christ as Lord.

quote:

Your God isn't my God and I am not subject to your beliefs.
It depends in what sense you're talking about. God is still God, whether you recognize Him as such or not, and you are subject to what He teaches in the Bible, whether you want to believe that or not. If you don't repent in this life and turn to Jesus by faith, you will be tormented for eternity for your rejection of the loving kindness of God.

quote:

Everyone here talks about a slippery slope but what about the slippery slope the other way? Technically Christianity is against alcohol, do we go back to prohibition? Christianity is against gambling, do we go back to making gambling illegal everywhere? Heck until fairly recently a lot of segments of Christianity (especially Baptists) prohibited dancing, do we make dancing illegal?
Christianity, in terms of what the Bible teaches, is not against alcohol, but I get your point. A Christian nation doesn't have to outlaw those things, though it wouldn't be necessarily wrong to do so (no one has a fundamental right to alcohol, gambling, or public dancing). I wouldn't advocate for a ban on any of those things, but gambling comes closest. That's just a personal preference, though.

quote:

Personal agency and assisted suicide is something I've become passionate about as I've gotten older. Animals are given a more humane death than humans. How can you justify that? Why should people have to suffer? What gives anyone the right to tell someone else they just have to suck it up when it's not then who are dealing with crippling depression/anxiety or a medical condition that greatly limits quality of life.
For one, the issue is greater than just giving someone the ability to end their own perceived or real suffering. It's about the value of human life. Justifying taking a life to reduce suffering of some kinds opens the door to taking a life to reduce other kinds of suffering, and we know that there are evil people in the world who are happy to redefine terms (like "suffering") to accomplish their goals, like reducing the population. All we have to do is accept that "a reduction of suffering" is a justification for taking lives, and we'll eventually get to the point where we take the lives of others to reduce suffering. We can end the lives of the old, the feeble, the mentally challenged, the handicapped, the unattractive, etc. "for their own good" and "for the good of society", all due to the noble cause of reducing suffering.

quote:

I do believe in a higher power but I don't believe in the idea of a heaven and a hell. I believe the universe doesn't waste energy and I do believe the soul is different than the body. The body might die but the soul does not. Due to that I believe in reincarnation.
Are these just logical leaps you're making based on a desire for some sort of spirituality? I'm honestly curious where you got these beliefs. Was it from revelation, or from an inward desire?

quote:

The problem I have with heaven and hell is the ways it can get messed up. Someone can live a horrible live for the first 50 years of their life, do terrible things, be "saved" and convert to Christianity and go to heaven? Meanwhile someone who lives a good life, volunteers and tries to help people but doesn't believe in God goes to hell? If that's the case that so called "heaven" doesn't sound like heaven at all and I would question any God who puts the first person in above the second person in that scenario.
We have to define terms and standards. What does "good" mean to you, and what standard are you using to determine who should go to Heaven and who should go to Hell? Is a person who dedicates their lives to the poor and helpless and who sacrifices much for others throughout their life get to go to Heaven if they murder one person before they die? How do you balance the scales to decide who is a good person and who is a bad person?

All religions base salvation, eternal life, or whatever view of Heaven or bliss on human works. It's the natural human response since we naturally want autonomy rather than than be subject to our creator. Christianity doesn't base salvation on our works, but on faith in Jesus' works on the cross. This is because the standard for "good" in God's eyes is perfect obedience to God's moral standard. Any deviation is called sin, and doesn't measure up to God's perfect righteousness. Everyone sins, and that's why God had to enter into His creation and become a man to obey the law perfectly and be our representative as a sacrifice for sin, so God could pour out His wrath on our moral imperfection in Jesus rather than in us, if we trust in that saving work.

quote:

People have far less control over their lives than most of us want to admit. Agency over our body and our decision to live or die is one of the things we should have absolute control over.
Why?

quote:

And yes making assisted suicide legal is opening pandora's box. And I say open that box, it's long past time.
So you recognize the terrible abuse that will likely come from allowing human lives to be taken in the name of "reduced suffering" and you're still OK with that?

quote:

And it shouldn't just be for terminal diseases. It should be available if someone is just tired of life and wants to end it. They should be able to go out peacefully and with dignity. If you want to say the doctor can administer the morphine (or whatever it used) that's fine, but it can be provided and then it's up to the person to administer the dose to end their life. But it should be legal and allowed.
Why help anyone? Why not kill off anyone who is in a less than desired state at any given time? It seems like you view humans as meaningless sacks of mostly water that should be disposed of whenever it seems agreeable to do so. That's really a shame.

You need to repent and acknowledge that you are a creature made in the image of God, and that you owe allegiance to your creator and obedience to Him. Because you fall short of the standard of perfection, you need to trust in the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross to cover your sins and make you right before God before you die and suffer. If you really want to reduce suffering, you need to repent and believe in Jesus. That is the only way to not only eliminate everlasting suffering for yourself, but to gain everlasting life.
first pageprev pagePage 4 of 4Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram