Assisted suicide

[Mahone]

I feel sorry for you Mahone, you fell victim to the emotionally charged analogy.

LOL trust me, I have more important things to worry about than comments people have made on this forum. At the end of the day, I have come onto a forum primarily full of lds, seeing as how the church and I disagree on many issues I didn't expect to get on with everyone

[Hemidakota]

I apologise if anyone was offended, however I still think you are pulling something out of my words that was never there to begin with.

The reason I made the comparison is that someone made a point of saying it is on a downward slippery slope to effectively allow someone who is gay marry a member of the same sex and that expecting society to allow this is causing their beliefs to be forced upon us. My point was that this is discrimination, just like how the blacks were treated was discrimination. The blacks also received a blacklash when they were finally given the same rights as white people, just like gay people who are now being given the same rights to marry who they wish as someone who is "straight" in a lot of places. I have never at any point said the discrimination levels were the same, I still believe with the point that I was making the comparison was valid.

You also seem to be suggesting from the highlighted sections of your post that gay people can in fact choose whether they want to be gay and that they should have to hide it. You also seem to suggest by your word "alleged" that you do not think they are discriminated against. These are points I am not willing to get into on this thread. I may post my thoughts on this somewhere else where it is more appropriate.

However once again, I sincerely apologise if anyone took offense from my words, however absolutely no offense was meant.

You know, I do not have a problem of those who choose to be Homosexual or Lesbians [H/L] in this telestial state. I have friends who chosen that path and claimed to find happiness. Yet, you are right, they have agency to choose the path in this mortal life. Also, this is nothing new since it been around from the days of Cain and will finally end prior to the earth entering in the Terrestrial state.

From my own observation, stupidity reigns with anyone who wishes to sin against which is an eternal doctrine/principle and pointless in striving to make a statement when viewing the eternal prospect of souls is lost.

Now, what I do condone is the very act of pushing the gospel of H/L, in telling us, this is a normal and acceptable act when GOD has stated since the beginning was and still is condone. I am not going to let those who are less than 2-3 percent of the population makes their sins as teachable and acceptable in any academic school. Does this mean our government officials are right? No! Go back and read any history when government officials began to allow wickedness to rule over society, including the Nephites, the Jaredites, it crumbles. We are currently at the mercy of the foolish and the unwise since they have a problem of comprehending past history mistakes and failed to see into the future for five seconds of fame.

[Dravin]

I think it’s pretty obvious that it is very juvenile to rely on a cartoon for your information about suicide.

Who said I got my information on suicide from a cartoon? I made a 'comment' about the whole slippery slope thing and use an image from a cartoon to make it, that is:

If suicide is legal, if people think suicide anywhere and anytime for anyone over 18 is perfectly fine, and there is money to be made you might get suicide booths, even more so if we start doing eugenics.

Now I have no clue if we'll reach that point but if we do it doesn't seem the insanely crazy, of course its a little crazy but that was kinda the point.

Interestingly enough (but not something connected to the point IMHO) if you made it bigger, made it mandatory and made it free and moved it to a camp and not the street corner those have existed before.

And you thought you knew how funny suicide is.

I can tell a heart rending story about the tragic life of a circus clown and yet somehow clowns can be funny. Being a quadriplegic is a barrel full of laughs, you'll love these:

What do you call a quadriplegic in the bushes? Rustle.

What do you call a quadriplegic on your doorstep? Matt.

What do you call a quadriplegic hanging on your wall? Art.

What do you call a quadriplegic swimming in the ocean? Bob.

I also have some holocaust jokes (got some chavanust ones as well) but I'll spare you those as they are funny in the, "Thats horrible, I can't beleive you said that!" way.

As far as knowing enough to pull off the suicide mimes all it takes is some basic knowledge of biology and possibly chemisty. If you want to get fancy physics, the ending of a human life, at least the physical aspect is pretty straight forward, though starving yourself to death is pretty hard to mime so the more mimable options are the ones that got chosen.

How old are you? Twelve?

Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints who are male are not able to serve until they are 19 years of age or older, they may in some circumstances serve when they are 18 when they will either be turning 19 in the MTC or their father is called to be a mission president. So I've never heard of anything (these days) going at younger than 18.

Now if we assume a full 2 years served that means most likely 21, not younger than 20. If not a full 2 years I'd at least be 18. Of course I left later than that (and did the two years) so the math works out different. My age is in my profile if you are that curious.

I’m curious as to the “suicide mimes” you came up with to off yourselves.

There was dual dueling pistols (automatics might not work, not enough delay between firing and discharge to ensure that both go off, you can also pull the trigger several times in misbelief when they misfire), drinking Drain-O or some other deadly but unitendified substance (its a mime, I can't exactly explain what the label says), running oneself through with a sword, both wall style and sepuku style, self hanging and my personal favorite chewing through to the vein in my wrist. I'm probably forgetting a few others, admittedly we weren't terribly original but then I never claimed to the the height of comedy just that we found it funny ergo, the subject can be funny.

For example, did you think of pills? Since that’s very common, I assume you looked on the internet to determine just how many pills is enough to kill you, but not enough to make you throw them up.

No, didn't do pills (additionally I was at the M(issionary)T(raining)C(enter), LDS Missionaries at the MTC when I went through did not get access to the internet (except maybe for some language programs, I spoke English, I wouldn't know) I understand they can do email now, but no surfing), though that may fall under the generic bottle of poison substances. I'm curious, when a mime does walking against the wind do they do the research to figure out exactly how high a velocity is required to provide the exact resistance they are trying to duplicate given their surface area and mass? If they do I have a whole new level of repect for them. Wonder if they also calculate just how thick the glass in a box has to be so their pushing against it doesn't break it, or calculate how fast it will take CO2 to build up to deadly levels in the given area if his box is air tight using his body's baseline for CO2 exhalation, bonus points if he includes increased resperation due to panic and if he mimes passing out.

Did you search out a place where no one would know where you were, so they couldn’t stop you? Motel rooms are great for hangings.

On a practical note if you fall far enough so as to break your neck instead of sufficate people finding and stopping you before the deed is done would be less of an issue. Same if you can smoke a stick of dynamite. Eating a sawed off shotgun also does the job (a non-sawed off is trickier but I suppose you could work something out). Of course the latter two are pretty messy no matter what you do, and if you let yourself drop to far for the first one you decapitate yourself which is also messy. Of course its not like you have to clean up the physical or emotional mess left behind.

I think it is pretty obvious that you determine this by talking to someone who is truly suicidal.

I figured this is the case, I was just wondering what the criteria for sound suicidal thoughts and unsound suicidal thoughts (we're talking about a women who doesn't have chronic (physical) pain to justify suicide). Yes its mostly gonna be judgement but even phsychitrists have guidlines.

I have no idea what it means, because you don’t make any sense.

It means in certain situations the state steps in and prevents suicide (Admittedly its from a message board but not to long ago somebody talked about some cops having him admitted for a suicide watch of 72 hours, if the guy is wrong and there is not such thing then the question is void, and I realize this probably varies by jurisdiction), this apparently is based on on certain criteria of mental stabilty and the like. Buying a snickers is also legal but generally we don't prevent people from doing such based on mental state. Somebody who commits suicide of sound mind as opposed to unsound mind isn't necessarily going to leave behind less emotional damage, cost more money or what have you. (As opposed to a psycho who joins the military they'll potentially damage (physically) more than themselves on their way out then someone committing suicide.)

The right thing to do, however, is to accept you don’t comprehend it, and stop acting as if you do by juvenile suicide mimes.

When did I ever say that I understood the mental and emotional aspects of suicide because of some jokes (the physical is pretty easy, its the cessation of life with a plethora of ways to accomplish that goal)?

I said it could be funny, just like pretty much anything given the right circumstances. Heck, I joked about a wife murdering her husband in another thread and yet somehow somebody found it funny even though if I randomly walked up to somebody in real life and shot them dead it generally wouldn't be considered funny (though if it was a weapon the NRA had fought to keep legal and the victim was the head of the NRA some mind find it ironic though, mostly pro-gun control circles). You apparently agree so I'm not sure what half the point of this thread is. The below quoted I can understand but if that was the point of the thread you've sure meandered your way to it. Though to be fair I get guilty of that pretty often.

I agree, suicide can be funny. But the only people who should get to joke about it are those who live with it.

I'm curious, how do you know if I know somebody who has committed suicide and thus earned the 'right' to crack jokes? You might know if I've attempted it if Church Guidelines prevent those who have attempted from serving on missions (don't know if that's the case, if not you wouldn't). So in the end you have no clue if I've somehow gained the 'right'. For the record I haven't (if said right is determined by somebody close to you committing suicide or having attempted it yourself), so now you have to requiste information. Well, at one point in my life I contemplated suicide but not all the seriously, though I suppose if that counts I guess I have earned it.

Also, do you stop people in the street to inform them that unless they have attempted suicide or had a loved one commit it such phrases as, "I'd kill myself before I date you." or "Go to the museum? I'd rather shoot myself" are being used without the 'right' to do so? Heck, Churchill had a rather witty comeback when a lady told him if they were married she'd poison his coffee. Don't know if he had the 'right' to do that though.

Tell me:

Should only people who have personally experience bitter racism against themselves (or a loved one) be able to joke about racists and racism?

Should only people who have actually practiced polygamy (or a loved one who has) be able to crack jokes about polygamgy?

Should only people who have been politicans (or a loved one who has) be able to crack jokes about politicians?

What about cops? Drugs? Poverty? Religion (and do we subdivide by each religion or is just being religious enough)? Adultry? Engineers? Staticians?Faux Pas (do you have to have made the same one, or is just having committed one enough?)? Being stranded on a deserted island? Blonds? Quadriplegics names?

I could go on but I'm sure you get my point even if you don't agree with it.

Edit: Its fine if you don't agree, we can always agree to disagree.

Edited April 7, 2009 by Dravin

[Elphaba]

I have friends who chosen that path and claimed to find happiness.

I do not believe someone as virulently opposed to "gayness," (your term) has any friends who are gay.

Why would they be friends with you when you deny what are fundamental aspects of their emotional and physical makeup that makes them gay?

Why would they be friends with you when you don't listen to them when they explain their homosexuality is not a choice?

Why would they be friends with someone who ignores their "claims," when they know better than you if they are happy or not.

Why would they want to be friends with someone as vocal as you that their homosexual relationships are sins?

There is nothing wrong with you believing any and all of the above. But I don't believe for one minute that you have any gay friends considering you do have those beliefs.

Elphaba

[bytor2112]

I do not believe someone as virulently opposed to "gayness," (your term) has any friends who are gay.

Why would they be friends with you when you deny what are fundamental aspects of their emotional and physical makeup that makes them gay?

Why would they be friends with you when you don't listen to them when they explain their homosexuality is not a choice?

Why would they be friends with someone who ignores their "claims," when they know better than you if they are happy or not.

Why would they want to be friends with someone as vocal as you that their homosexual relationships are sins?

There is nothing wrong with you believing any and all of the above. But I don't believe for one minute that you have any gay friends considering you do have those beliefs.

Elphaba

Maybe they just like having a diverse group of friends.....

[Elphaba]

Maybe they just like having a diverse group of friends.....

Friends that call them sinners?

I suppose it is possible. After all, I have been told by a very small number of people here that they like me because I am a sinner.

Oh wait, that's supposed to read: "in spite of me being a sinner."

My bad.

Elphaba

[bytor2112]

Friends that call them sinners?

I suppose it is possible. After all, I have been told by a very small number of people here that they like me because I am a sinner.

Oh wait, that's supposed to read: "in spite of me being a sinner."

My bad.

Elphaba

They are sinners and so are you Elph. .......and so am I and so are we all.

[prospectmom]

I am definatly one of those sinners

[Elphaba]

And when there are people who want a body more than anything else...........

I hope she changes her mind, for her own well being.

How is her commiting suicide at an elderly age preventing someone else from having a body?

Elphaba

[Elphaba]

Who said I got my information on suicide from a cartoon?

I did.

I made a 'comment' >snip< doing eugenics.

Do you seriously think people who are not suicidal are going to walk by your toy, think to themselves “I’m depressed today,“ and walk into the thing?

Do you seriously think people who are severely suicidal are going to walk into your toy and kill themselves, when one of the major hurdles to committing suicide is finding a place where no one will see you?

Now I have no clue if we'll reach that point but if we do it doesn't seem the insanely crazy, of course its a little crazy but that was kinda the point.

What point?

Look, it’s a joke. I get that. It’s a cartoon, and I assume the gist of it was a frustrated robot, or whatever they are in that cartoon. That does not bother me.

It bothers me you post it on a thread about Assisted Suicide, which is a very serious issue, not something to mock.

Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints who are >snip<'

I know you have to be 19 to go into the MTC. My point is, you were acting like a twelve-year-old when you kept miming suicides in order to make fun of a fellow missionary.

That’s what twelve-year-olds do, not nineteen-year-olds. Get it?

There was dual dueling pistols (automatics might not work, not enough >snip<, the subject can be funny.

I guess you had to be there.

I'm curious, >snip< area and mass?

You are not curious at all. You’re mocking me.

If they do I have a whole new level of repect >snip< if he mimes passing out.

Again, you have no new level of respect for anything. You’re mocking me.

On a practical note if you fall far enough >snip< Of course its not like you have to clean up the physical or emotional mess left behind.

Mocking.

I figured this is the case, I was just wondering what the criteria for sound suicidal thoughts and unsound suicidal thoughts (we're talking about a women who doesn't have chronic (physical) pain to justify suicide). Yes its mostly gonna be judgement but even phsychitrists have guidlines.

I could explain some reasons, but you’re not really interested.

It means in certain situations the state steps in and prevents suicide (Admittedly its from a message board but not to long ago somebody talked about some cops having him admitted for a suicide watch of 72 hours, if the guy is wrong and there is not such thing then the question is void, and I realize this probably varies by jurisdiction), this apparently is based on certain criteria of mental stabilty and the like.

This is true, and once that person gets out of the 72-hour lock-down, she will add to her list of strategies how to make sure she doesn’t get stuck in lock down again before committing suicide.

Buying a snickers >snip< committing suicide.)

I have no idea what you meant by this.

When did I ever say that I understood the mental and emotional aspects of suicide because of some jokes.

You didn’t. I explained them, hoping you would catch on how out of line your jokes were in this particular thread.

(the physical is pretty easy, its the cessation of life with a plethora of ways to accomplish that goal)?

Yes, the physical is pretty easy. So is the emotional to someone who knows what to look for; the only difference is the emotional is not as overt.

You apparently agree so I'm not sure what half the point of this thread is. The below quoted I can understand but if that was the point of the thread you've sure meandered your way to it. Though to be fair I get guilty of that pretty often.

The last thing I’ve done in this thread is meander.

Also, if you didn’t understand what half the point of this thread is, why in the world did you respond to it?

I'm curious, how do you know if I know somebody who has commit/ted suicide and thus earned the 'right' to crack jokes?

How do you think I know?

You might know if I've attempted it if Church Guidelines prevent those who have attempted from serving on missions (don't know if that's the case, if not you wouldn't). So in the end you have no clue if I've somehow gained the 'right'.

Believe me, I do. You haven’t.

For the record I haven't (if said right is determned by somebody close to you committing suicide or having attempted it yourself), so now you have to requiste information.

Thanks for letting me know.

Well, at one point in my life I contemplated suicide but not all the seriously, though I suppose if that counts I guess I have earned it.

At one point in most people’s lives they contemplate suicide, but not seriously. They are usually overwhelmed and depressed, in a bad situation, or many other possibilities. But they’re not truly serious about dying.

Also, do you stop people in the street to inform them that unless they have attempted suicide or had a loved one commit it such phrases as, "I'd kill myself before I date you." or "Go to the museum? I'd rather shoot myself" are being used without the 'right' to do so?

Of course not. I'd only say one of those things if it is true.

Heck, Churchill had a rather witty comeback when a lady told him if they were married she'd poison his coffee. Don't know if he had the 'right' to do that though.

He was responding to her rude comment. It wasn't a serious discussion about suicide.

Tell me" Should only people who have personally experience bitter racism against themselves (or a loved one) be able to joke about racists and racism?

Should only people who have actually practiced polygamy (or a loved one who has) be able to crack jokes about polygamgy?

Should only people who have been politicans (or a loved one who has) be able to crack jokes about politicians?

What about cops? Drugs? Poverty? Religion (and do we subdivide by each religion or is just being religious enough)? Adultry? Engineers? Staticians?Faux Pas (do you have to have made the same one, or is just having committed one enough?)? Being stranded on a deserted island? Blonds? Quadriplegics names?

Yes. Yes they should. To every single one of them. Especially, the cops. And the blondes, definitely the blondes. Oh wait, I’d rather we use the statisticians than the blondes. Okay, I’m done.

Can I still add polygamy?

I could go on but I'm sure you get my point even if you don't agree with it.

Oh, yes, I got your point.

Did you get mine?

Elphaba

[Dravin]

I did.

Well you'd be incorrect then, I've never actually watch Futurama.

Do you seriously think people who are severely suicidal are going to walk into your toy and kill themselves, when one of the major hurdles to committing suicide is finding a place where no one will see you?

Isn't that the case because somebody will stop you? If you have suicide booths the cops aren't exactly going to prevent you from entering or a pair of EMTs bring you back, also such a thing would signal quite a change on society's views on suicide far more than healthy doctor assisted suicide.

That’s what twelve-year-olds do, not nineteen-year-olds. Get it?

Well that's demonstrably false.

You are not curious at all. You’re mocking me.

And you weren't actually requesting information on my age and what I've researched on killing one's self.

I could explain some reasons, but you’re not really interested.

I was unware that you could read my mind.

This is true, and once that person gets out of the 72-hour lock-down, she will add to her list of strategies how to make sure she doesn’t get stuck in lock down again before committing suicide.

Okay, my question is this. Since suicide is legal (not questioning this point) what is the legal rational for doing something like this. Generally we don't prevent people from doing legal stuff.

I have no idea what you meant by this.

See and instead of assuming you weren't just interested I actually gave you the benefit of a doubt and tried to explain again, I obviously failed but its the thought that counts. My use of snickers is flippant but see above to see what I'm trying to ask.

Also, if you didn’t understand what half the point of this thread is, why in the world did you respond to it?

Why in the world did you respond to mine? I doubt it was for the witty repartee since there isn't any. Sometimes we do things because nothing else pops up as pressing at the time.

How do you think I know?

Well now because I told you, before you didn't actually know you just assumed.

Of course not. I'd only say one of those things if it is true.

Not much for hyperbole, suppose there is nothing wrong with that.

Did you get mine?

Yep, I just disagree with it.

[Maxel]

How is her commiting suicide at an elderly age preventing someone else from having a body?

Elphaba

I read her comment as a mention of the 1/3 of the hosts of heaven that followed Satan and didn't come to this earth and receive a body at all. The irony is that there are those who now would give anything to have a body, and this woman is willing to give hers up due to her husband's death- even though she came to earth to get a body in the first place.

I do not believe someone as virulently opposed to "gayness," (your term) has any friends who are gay.

My best friend in 6th-10th grades came out of the closet in my senior year of high school. By that time we had mostly fallen out of touch, although we still hung out at social events. He told me he was now happier, and our mutual friends also said he reported being more happy. He certainly seemed happier; his acne had cleared up and he was smiling more. However, he knew all along that I thought committing homosexual acts is a sin (he might have even believed I thought being gay was a sin)- yet we were still friends. I am no longer in contact with that friend, but my own experience reflects Hemidakota's.

Anyway, bringing this back to the OP-

Is there anyone who thinks that the woman has every right to take her own life, and that there's nothing morally reprehensible about it? Remember, the woman in the article is perfectly healthy but wants to die when her husband does. Millner, the man advocating her right to choose (ah, the irony), is claiming suicide is a basic human right.

Edited April 8, 2009 by Maxel

[Elphaba]

Isn't that the case because somebody will stop you? If you have suicide booths the cops aren't exactly going to prevent you from entering or a pair of EMTs bring you back, also such a thing would signal quite a change on society's views on suicide far more than healthy doctor assisted suicide.

You seem to infer assisted suicide is a callous and impersonal thing that disregards the sanctity of life. In the cases I am aware of, it is not. If anything, it celebrates that life. Society has not changed in this instance, nor is it going to.

Why would this woman want to commit suicide? I think the following might be some of the reasons:

She is eldery, and the years in front of her could be few, or still many. She sees endless hours, minutes, and seconds whiling away the hours in front of a television set because she is too depressed to do anything else. She finds the thought of this repellant.

She knows she will soon lose her independence, and will have to rely on others to do things for her she has been doing for her entire life. For the elderly, this is a signal the end is nigh.

Because she is elderly, she is terrified of the health risks she will now take for the rest of her life.

For example, she might fall and break her hip, which is a debilitating condition to most of the elderly. Or she might have a stroke and not be able to communicate with anyone. Or she might go blind, lose her hearing, or some other malady that ruins the quality of life.

And during all of this , she will be in constant anguish, grieving her husband terribly, despondent her life is over because he is gone. Gone and never coming back. Why would she want to live through that?

I’m not saying I am in favor of assisted suicide in cases like hers, as I am very conflicted about it. I’m just giving you reasons she would want to commit suicide.

Additionally, suicide has been legal now for a while, and no, these rescue interventions have not stopped. Why would you expect them too?

Just because suicide is legal doesn't mean people will stop having compassion for suicidal people, or that they will not do everything they can to stop the suicide.

Also, you'll notice that if you do try to suicide, and are discovered, you're not thrown into jail. You are not indicted for a crime, nor are you convicted and sentenced to prison time. There are no legal ramifications for you committing suicide.

There may be emotional ones that call for the law to intervene, such as a three-day lock-down evaluation in a psych ward, or that sort of thing.

But that is no different than the way suicide attempts have been handled by all of the rescue units available for decades now.

Additionally, making suicide legal is not going to stop a truly suicidal person from killing himself. Anyone who is at that point, and knows it is going to happen, has no interest in the law whatsoever.

Our understanding of suicide will evolve, and different treatments will be tried. But this will never stop, and I only see those who want to help doing as much as they can to do so. I do not see a callous disregard for life that your scenario seems to imply.

And you weren't actually requesting information on my age and what I've researched on killing one's self.

No, I wasn’t.. I knew how old you were because you were in the MTC. I was explaining you acted like you were twelve by making fun of your fellow missionary.

I was unware that you could read my mind.

Well, now you are.

Okay, my question is this. Since suicide is legal (not questioning this point) what is the legal rational for doing something like this. Generally we don't prevent people from doing legal stuff.

I’ve already answered this above. But I’m going to repeat what I wrote in an earlier message to you, because you still want to make this a simple thing where people casually off themselves while society watches on because we’ve made it legal. It’s not like that, in that people who commit suicide do not do so casually or with a disregard for life.

Suicide is a particularly awful way to die: the mental suffering leading up to it is usually prolonged, intense, and agonizing. There is no morphine equivalent to ease the acute pain, and after doing everything you can think of to stop the pain, the exhaustion takes over, and you realize you passed “the end“ long ago, and that it is never going to stop. At this point, you’re not “in” pain; rather, you “are” pain.

You keep trying by pushing yourself, desperate for help. You end up in the hospital’s psych ward with its assembly line psychiatry where no one can spend any one-on-one time with you, and thus, they never really get to the suicide issue.

It’s not their fault; in fact, if they didn’t care, the psych ward is the last place they’d want to work. But they’re overworked, and underpaid, doing the best they can, which means many patients fall through the net, and walk out the door strategizing how, where, and when.

When you’re at this point, the taint of suicide hovers over you. Death is inches away, some, genuinely, for the rest of their lives. You strategize and revise your strategies every minute of the day. You are desperate to end the terror, agony, isolation, despair, and the only thing that really works is to stop strategizing, and choose. Then. . . the relief.

Relief. It's the best feeling you‘ve had for years. The decision is made, and you know it‘s almost over. The terror of lucid dreams, the endless nights of isolation and endless pain are soon at an end.

That is one very good description of suicidal feelings, and they are not going to change simply because they are now legal.

Why in the world did you respond to mine?

Because I enjoyed the conversation. I am not the one who said it didn’t make sense--you are.

Well now because I told you, before you didn't actually know you just assumed.

No, that is not why. Guess again.

Not much for hyperbole, suppose there is nothing wrong with that.

Except when you use the word incorrectly.

Yep, I just disagree with it.

And you get to disagree with it.

Elphaba

[Hemidakota]

I do not believe someone as virulently opposed to "gayness," (your term) has any friends who are gay.

Why would they be friends with you when you deny what are fundamental aspects of their emotional and physical makeup that makes them gay?

Why would they be friends with you when you don't listen to them when they explain their homosexuality is not a choice?

Why would they be friends with someone who ignores their "claims," when they know better than you if they are happy or not.

Why would they want to be friends with someone as vocal as you that their homosexual relationships are sins?

There is nothing wrong with you believing any and all of the above. But I don't believe for one minute that you have any gay friends considering you do have those beliefs.

Elphaba

Wasn't not the Lord that stated, there is no happiness in sin? I know when there is sin within me, there is no Spirit. They are still friends but to pretend to such, is pure foolishness.

[GingerGolden]

Is there anyone who thinks that the woman has every right to take her own life, and that there's nothing morally reprehensible about it? Remember, the woman in the article is perfectly healthy but wants to die when her husband does. Millner, the man advocating her right to choose (ah, the irony), is claiming suicide is a basic human right.

I think she has the right to do as she pleases.

I do think she will be sorrowful when she finds herself on the other side and learns that she really had more to do while being alive and that if she does do it, she will be wishing that she hadn't done so.

BTW, I did think the cartoon booth was funny, but I have a strange and wacky sense of humor. I laugh when I feel like laughing, but I hardly think it's something to argue over...

Do I have the right to laugh about a silly cartoon booth, why yes I certainly do! And I am most definitely not arguing that point.

[GingerGolden]

I have some questions as well...

These people in the OP, how old are they?

Do they have children or grandchildren?

Will they check to make sure that the woman is not pregnant before putting her to death?

I only ask because I am curious and well if there are children and grandchildren, then being perfectly healthy, she's leaving them behind, which I don't think is such a great idea.

If she's pregnant, how can they put her to death without considering that they are taking another totally innocent life?

Of course, we may not have the answers to these questions, but they are certainly something to consider.

BTW, I'm a sinner too.

Edited April 8, 2009 by GingerGolden

[Elphaba]

Wasn't not the Lord that stated, there is no happiness in sin? I know when there is sin within me, there is no Spirit. They are still friends but to pretend to such, is pure foolishness.

So you are friends with gays, but let them know you think their lives are sinful?

And your gay friends don't mind this?

Sorry, Hemi. I don't buy it.

Elphaba

[Dravin]

You seem to infer assisted suicide is a callous and impersonal thing that disregards the sanctity of life

Naw, I'm just saying that it is service provided. The ending of life takes a lot less sophistication than saving one in most circumstances so its a service that could be provide by a machine, in a lot of cases its self-administered (of course in that case it obviously isn't assisted). I suppose I am ignorant on the subject though, is there mandatory sit-downs or screenings by (or performed on behalf) of the doctor before he'll assist? The whole reason for doctor assisted suicide that I can see are the following: Nobody is going to stop you, nobody is going to bring you back, and its painless. Though I suppose there is a fourth for those in very poor medical condition and that is sitting in a hospital bed they aren't in a position phyiscally to get to such a booth if it exsisted or go through the rigormorole of doing it the old fashion way of making sure you won't be interrupted.

As far as reflecting a change in society's views it would remove any ideas of medical oversight or anything resembling screening. Makes it less medical and more getter done. Seeing your comment about compassion I'd imagine such a society would be less for treating people who are suicide and just giving them a quater and dropping them off on the street corner, that's pure conjecture on my part though.

Something has come of this conversation, the more I've been forced/encouraged to think about it even if legally such a thing could exist I don't see us reaching that point even if doctor assisted suicide lost any and all stigmas that are currently attached to it by society . Just like if abortion reached the status of some radical feminists would approve of I don't think we'd get abort-o-matics they'd still be performed by doctors. My understanding is that in Soviet Russia the prefered form of birth control was abortion instead of the pill (this is coming from the dusty shelves of my memory, this may not be correct) and even if they could I don't think they would have put up abort-o-matics.

Of course that means if we did get suicide booths then society has change a whole heck of a lot but it becomes less useful to speculate on that. It's be like speculating what would happen if Stalin the 2nd gained power in the US, good with some popcorn but not exactly of any use in discussing the current societal situation.

Additionally, suicide has been legal now for a while, and no, these rescue interventions have not stopped. Why would you expect them too?

Just because suicide is legal doesn't mean people will stop having compassion for suicidal people, or that they will not do everything they can to stop the suicide.

I generally don't consider the state in the buisness of preventing me from doing stuff that isn't A criminal (so suicide doesn't fall under that) or B a danger to others (most suicide attempts don't fall under that) doesn't matter how compansionate the state is or how much society at large doesn't want me to do it or even how much thought I put into it or how much emotional pain may have led up to the desicion. Think of abortion, most of society doesn't want this to be my first choice, a lot of society will help me with this not being the case, the law will even prevent me at a certain point from performing it when it feels I would cross over in to B territory however the state does not prevent me from doing it before that point, there is no 72 abortion prevention lock-ups to see if I'm actually going to go through with it. This does not mean society has no opinion on the matter or is even cheering me on, or that such decisions are being made lightly and on a whim. You can even get counseling if you are thinking about it same as you can get counciling if you are thinking about suicide but the state does not prevent it.

I think you are infering something I'm not trying to imply, that the decision to kill yourself is on the same level as deciding to buy a snickers (and my fault for using that analogy, I can see why you may not have understood what I'm trying to say). I'm just saying as far as I understand they are both equally legal, why does the state step in to prevent one and not the other. Historical precendent and opposition to suicide and not to Snickers is an answer but I was wondering if there was some legal distrinction I'm missing.

Because I enjoyed the conversation. I am not the one who said it didn’t make sense--you are.

Well, I did and do derive some measure of enjoyment from posting. On a more nitpicky note, one of the ways to get around to undersanding someone's point if you don't understand it would be continued discourse, so if one didn't understand and wanted to, replying to the post is the obvious thing to do.

No, that is not why. Guess again.

I suppose you could have done a background check.

People can still be insensitive punks and still experienced personal tragedy, so the fact you feel I'm a dork on the subject doesn't actually let you know anything. Most people would be more sensitive so you can assume and in most cases safely but that isn't the same as knowing.

I had a cousin die and one almost die because somebody ran a red light, was persued by the cops thus he ran another light to get away, he plowed into the car my cousins were in. The one who died was riding shotgun, after the accident he was behind the driver. The driver almost died, would have if not for the fortune of the accident happening literally in sight and sound of the hospital, they heard the the accident in the ER, if he'd been much further way he wouldn't have made it.

This isn't an appeal to claim, "I know somebody who died, I understand suicide." Because I don't, even if somebody who was close commited it I don't think I would, the concept of taking your own life because continued life is to horrid to contimplate will always be foreign to me unless I take a visit there myself. What I'm saying is that people can make jokes about speeding, running from the cops or disobeying traffic signs and I won't react in any way different than somebody who hasn't experienced what I have. Heck, I even crack such jokes myself, there would be no way to tell from such behavior any passed history I may or may not have on the subject.

Except when you use the word incorrectly.

My understanding of that word is pretty much spot on with dictionary.com

hy⋅per⋅bo⋅le   [hahy-pur-buh-lee]

–noun Rhetoric.

1. obvious and intentional exaggeration.

2. an extravagant statement or figure of speech not intended to be taken literally, as “to wait an eternity.”

"I'd rather shoot myself than go out with you." falls under it as far as I can tell just as any other number of "I'd rather do X than Y" comments that get thrown around, of course if you'd rather do X then Y then it isn't exageration but most people don't assume you'd rather end your life then go to a museum or a date.

What is your understanding of the word?

[Elphaba]

BTW, I did think the cartoon booth was funny, but I have a strange and wacky sense of humor. I laugh when I feel like laughing, but I hardly think it's something to argue over...

Do I have the right to laugh about a silly cartoon booth, why yes I certainly do! And I am most definitely not arguing that point.

Of course you're arguing that point. Good for you!

My point wasn't that the cartoon was not funny, though it was not funny to me. It was that it was inappropriate in a serious thread about suicide.

Dravin's going to love this, because it looks like I'm the only person who feels this way. It happens.

Elphaba

Edited April 8, 2009 by Elphaba

[Elphaba]

Originally Posted by Elphaba How is her commiting suicide at an elderly age preventing someone else from having a body?

I read her comment as a mention of the 1/3 of the hosts of heaven that followed Satan and didn't come to this earth and receive a body at all.

Why would it even occur to her to think of them. These disembodied spirits are considered to be devils. Who would want a devil to have a body?

Of course, she knows best what she meant.

The irony is that there are those who now would give anything to have a body, and this woman is willing to give hers up due to her husband's death- even though she came to earth to get a body in the first place..

Why is that ironic?

She came to earth to get a body. She got that body. What does it matter at this point if she gives it up?

Are all of her records erased, earthly and heavenly? Is it as if she never existed? What about the time she did use that body, which I assume, was quite a while now?

My best friend in 6th-10th grades came out of the closet in my senior year of high school. >snip< I am no longer in contact with that friend, but my own experience reflects Hemidakota's.

Hardly.

This person was your best friend at one point. You say he knew you believed homosexual behavior was a sin, but you are not sure how he knows that, and, in fact, admit he might think you believe being gay is a sin. Obviously you didn't have ongoing conversations about it.

Hemi, on the other hand, is extremely vocal about his belief that people who are gay are sinners; in fact, he just wrote another post about it. And I have no problem with him believing that.

However, based on his personality, including his disdain for “gayness,” I do not believe him that he has gay friends.

Is there anyone who thinks that the woman has every right to take her own life,

Explain what you mean by "right"?

I know it sounds like an obvious question, but it's not.

For example, does she have the right to stop unbearable psychic pain if it will not alleviate on its own? Yes, she does, and the kindest thing everyone could do is to listen to her, believe her, and then be with her so that she is not alone at the end.

What about other circumstances? Is it "yes," then "no,", "no," "no," then "yes"? I think so, though I obviously don't really have a clue.

My point being that yes, there are times when you have the right to kill yourself. There are circumstances where life is never going to get any better, and it is simply too painful the way it is.

That is a fact most people don't want to accept, especially those who have never experienced it. But it is a fact, nonetheless, and we should not demand people stay alive to meet our particular belief systems. You simply know nothing about what they're experiencing, so accept that, then leave it alone.

Elphaba

[Dravin]

Hemi, on the other hand, is extremely vocal about his belief that people who are gay are sinners; in fact, he just wrote another post about it. And I have no problem with him believing that.

To be fair there are some subjects we are a lot more vocal about online then we are in real life, particularly around people we know might be offended though not necessarily. Now you've been active on the board more than I have so you may know more about what he actually tells his friends then I do. Just something to keep in mind though.

Online I might go on about the evils of coinhabitation when ever the subject comes up but that doesn't mean if I have a friend doing so I don't shut up about the subject around him.

[Elphaba]

To be fair there are some subjects we are a lot more vocal about online then we are in real life, particularly around people we know might be offended though not necessarily. Now you've been active on the board more than I have so you may know more about what he actually tells his friends then I do. Just something to keep in mind though.

Online I might go on about the evils of coinhabitation when ever the subject comes up but that doesn't mean if I have a friend doing so I don't shut up about the subject around him.

All very true.

And then there is Hemi.

Elphaba

[Maxel]

Why would it even occur to her to think of them. These disembodied spirits are considered to be devils. Who would want a devil to have a body?

The devil wants to have a body, and his followers. When Christ cast out Legion from the crazy man, they pleaded to allow him to send them into a herd of swine rather than simply be cast out of all physical bodies. (Mark 5:12)

Why is that ironic?

She came to earth to get a body. She got that body. What does it matter at this point if she gives it up?

Giving it up for no reason (or a very bad one) is a very, very bad idea. We didn't come to earth just to get a body; we came to earth to get a body so that we could inherit the celestial glory that our Father in heaven enjoys. Giving up that glorious gift- our physical bodies- due to anticipated pain is cowardly and an act that, in normal circumstances, would forfeit the person's right to Celestial glory.

This person was your best friend at one point. You say he knew you believed homosexual behavior was a sin, but you are not sure how he knows that, and, in fact, admit he might think you believe being gay is a sin. Obviously you didn't have ongoing conversations about it.

I don't want to beat this one story endlessly, as it's irrelevant. Just to clarify, though: my friend knew that I thought homosexuality was a sin (that bare fact we did discuss a few times). Whether he realized I thought having homosexual temptations (i.e., 'being gay') was sin, or just acting on them was sin; that's where I'm confused about his knowledge of my own position.

Explain what you mean by "right"?

I know it sounds like an obvious question, but it's not.

No; that's actually a good question.

For example, does she have the right to stop unbearable psychic pain if it will not alleviate on its own? Yes, she does, and the kindest thing everyone could do is to listen to her, believe her, and then be with her so that she is not alone at the end.

I disagree with you, and I frankly refuse the idea that the kindest thing to do would be just to listen and take no action to stop her. Dealing with the death of loved ones is a normal part of life. Wanting to die is a normal part of human existence. However, acting on that desire and ending one's life prematurely due to that emotional pain is immoral and wrong. The struggle is overcoming the pain and getting on with one's own life- there is life after death; both others' and our own.

My point being that yes, there are times when you have the right to kill yourself. There are circumstances where life is never going to get any better, and it is simply too painful the way it is.

That is a fact most people don't want to accept, especially those who have never experienced it. But it is a fact, nonetheless, and we should not demand people stay alive to meet our particular belief systems. You simply know nothing about what they're experiencing, so accept that, then leave it alone.

You know nothing about what I've experienced in my own life- I am well acquainted with the desire to end my own life due to severe emotional pain. What I have learned is that life goes on; life gets better. Anyone wanting to die- who's not even experiencing that pain yet, but only planning to avoid it altogether!- to avoid life's hardships is taking the coward's way out and applying a long-term solution to a short-term problem. That is a fact some don't want to accept, but it is a fact nonetheless, and because that is the truth, we should encourage people to take the right roads and fight social reforms aimed at making that act acceptable and ordinary.

[Islander]

It will serve well to some to READ the OP and early responses.

The argument here is two fold; one the right to do whatever they desire as long as it has not been deemed illegal by the law of the land. That is a no-brainier. GOD in the other hand, we believe, has dictated HIS own law and commanded us to behave in a certain way regardless of the man-made laws. The moral and religious objection to suicide comes from those who hold that God's law is supreme.

Getting into the humanistic aspect of the debate is kind of a useless exercise since some people can and do believe what they will and claim whatsoever right suits them to satisfy their needs. What is a fact of social history is that morality as a concept has been eroded, ethics as a concept has been eroded, life as sacred is no longer, the definition of family has been convoluted to fit a man made "modern" construct and the basic rights afforded in the constitution (as granted by God, by the way) have become whatever rights I happen to claim in order to accommodate my social agenda, even to the exclusion of God from the public conversation.