Condemning the Right to Die

[KenRU]

Many denominations of Christianity condemn the right to die when terminally ill. I've often wondered why anyone who holds that position could condone the suffering that results, and how that position could possibly ever be seen as a good/moral/right position to hold.

To illustrate my point and for the purposes of debate, assume the following:

The patient is terminally ill.

The patient is in pain.

The patient is of sound mind.

The patient no longer wishes to suffer, and wishes to end his/her own life.

For the sake of clarity, please use the standard and common definition for all words.


Does it just boil down to, Thou Shall Not Kill? End of conversation?

How does one justify the suffering a terminally ill patient will endure - perhaps even for years - when denying that right? It never made sense to me.



For debate:
If you are opposed to the Right To Die, please make your argument:

1) Why this is the right/good position to hold.
2) Why this position shouldn't be seen as callous, cruel and/or selfish.
3) Why it should be the law of the land.
4) Why the opposing side is wrong.

If you support the Right To Die, please make your argument:

1) Why this is the right/good position to hold.
2) Why this position shouldn't be seen as murder and just plain wrong.
3) Why it should be the law of the land.
4) Why the other side is wrong.

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 20 by JehovahsWitness]

What then is your point? That you agree with me if your atheism didn't stand in the way? If so, all I can say is ... duly noted.

No. I don't agree with you, irrespective of my belief in a creator or not. You say that you believe that as you were created, your life is not your own, it belongs to your creator, and I am saying that even if I believed I had a creator (and not just human parents), I hold the opposite belief (that one's life is their own, and that it does not belong to their creator).

Perhaps you could discuss why you feel the way you do with someone who cares.

And here is where I find the much vaunted Christian compassion (whether mainstream Protestent/Catholic or your own JW flavour) towards their fellow man.

[JehovahsWitness]

However MY God sounds to you; He is my God not yours.

Doesn't the JW group teach that he is the God of all?

No we do not. There is indeed one Creator that intitated and sustains all life, but not everyone serves or worships that True Creator. The bible mentions there being multiple gods which people serve/worship/believe in/follow.

The God we worship is called JEHOVAH (Hebrew Yawheh/Yehowah).

MICAH 4:5
Indeed all the nations may walk in the name of their gods; but we will walk in the name of Yahweh our God forever and ever. - World English Bible

[1213]

Many denominations of Christianity condemn the right to die when terminally ill. I've often wondered why anyone who holds that position could condone the suffering that results, and how that position could possibly ever be seen as a good/moral/right position to hold.

To illustrate my point and for the purposes of debate, assume the following:

The patient is terminally ill. ...

I am not denying it, because I believe people are free to kill themselves if they want so. Maybe it is not good for possible after life, but still, it is person's own life. But I think the reasons for doing so can be really bad. For example, terminally ill. People dont know the future, what if person kills himself when he could have been healed after one year? If there would come some cure for the disease and the person is killed just before that?

I think better thing would be to focus on something else than death and pain. But obviously it may be easier to say than do so.

[Tired of the Nonsense]

[Replying to post 1 by KenRU]

As one of Jehovah's Witnesses who defend my right to refuse a blood based medical treatements even if (which is admitedly rare) this means I lose my life, I do defend the right of a person to make decisions about their lives. That said that right is in my opinion based on the sanctity of life which belongs to God, not on prematurely ending their lives to avoid suffering.


JW

Why should anyone be in a position of imposing their views on the decision making process of others? How outraged would you be if someone were in a position of deciding that someone you loved no longer had any meaningful value to their life and that they should be terminated? About as outraged as someone who has a terminal disease and was facing the prospect of a long and painful decline would be, because someone else decided that their deity disapproves of self termination.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 1 by KenRU]

As one of Jehovah's Witnesses who defend my right to refuse a blood based medical treatements even if (which is admitedly rare) this means I lose my life, I do defend the right of a person to make decisions about their lives. That said that right is in my opinion based on the sanctity of life which belongs to God, not on prematurely ending their lives to avoid suffering.


JW

Why should anyone be in a position of imposing their views on the decision making process of others?

Why are you asking me this? I don't believe anyone should impose their views on others, I was simply sharing my own.

[Tired of the Nonsense]

[Replying to post 1 by KenRU]

As one of Jehovah's Witnesses who defend my right to refuse a blood based medical treatements even if (which is admitedly rare) this means I lose my life, I do defend the right of a person to make decisions about their lives. That said that right is in my opinion based on the sanctity of life which belongs to God, not on prematurely ending their lives to avoid suffering.


JW

Why should anyone be in a position of imposing their views on the decision making process of others?

Why are you asking me this? I don't believe anyone should impose their views on others, I was simply sharing my own.

You do believe that God should be the final judge on who dies and when though, don't you? Christians have managed for years to impose their religious beliefs on others. And then they squeal in confused agony when they experience angry push back.

[JehovahsWitness]

You do believe that God should be the final judge on who dies and when though, don't you?

Yes, I do believe that. What part of that is my imposing anything on anyone?

[KenRU]

The right to refuse a certain medical treatment (even if it might lead to their death) is not imho to be confused with deliberately ending one's life.

There are situations where there is no practical difference between the two, though, correct?

This I believe is murder "self murder" which is not an option for a Christian because our lives are ours on loan, it really belongs to God and only he has the right to say when it will or will not end.

I think it does not help the conversation to conflate the word Murder with the action of taking your own life. Taking your own life is most accurately called Suicide - not murder (your use of Self-murder not withstanding).

So no, I do not believe a person has the right to deliberately end their life to avoid suffering.

How then do you reconcile a supposedly good being (as god is supposed to be) mandating needless suffering? To me that is decidedly not the actions of a merciful or benevolent god.

JW, thanks for replying!

-all the best

[KenRU]

For example, terminally ill. People dont know the future, what if person kills himself when he could have been healed after one year? If there would come some cure for the disease and the person is killed just before that?

Exactly the point, 1213. No one knows the future, but if the patient is diagnosed as Terminally Ill - they are terminal by all current standards of treatment.

My point in bringing up this topic is to examine the arguments of why denying this person the right to end their own suffering can be rightly called good, compassionate or right.

In essence, one would be INCREASING the length of time someone would suffer, if this right were denied.

Shouldn't this be consider cruel and a bad decision?

I think better thing would be to focus on something else than death and pain. But obviously it may be easier to say than do so.

The point of this thread is to discuss the pros and cons of each side - given the conditions listed in the OP.

[JehovahsWitness]

How then do you reconcile a supposedly good being (as god is supposed to be) mandating needless suffering?

Because suffering is not "needless" I believe it serves a purpose, which I did explain earlier (see link below - scroll down to last paragraph)
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 631#877631

Further God's permission of human suffering serves a purpose which is why he permits it in the first place. I also wrote earlier on this topic, here is the link in case you missed it.

Why does God permit suffering?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 740#873740