| Welcome to Godlimations. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| The judging of suicides and murder; What happens when accused | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: 6 Jan 2010, 09:25 PM (1,053 Views) | |
| Concolor | 7 Jan 2010, 06:19 PM Post #16 |
|
Barabbas
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
@ARAZEC:How? Christ died to give you life. You want to be like Christ and pick up your own cross. Why would you not die to give others life? Because: 1. I do not follow the Bible 2. This is not to judge since I haven't sent anyone to hell. I have given an evaluation of this act as an immoral one. Much the same as we do when we say "you did good" to a boy who helps an old lady across the street. We evaluate his action. At no point did I say anything about love, my feelings towards this persons, or even anything about this person at all. I evaluated the ACT. And the act is a wrong one. Sure. We could have loads of different examples leading to all sorts of results. Some good, some bad, some so-so. That's my entire point. This is NOT a black and white picture. There are situations in which a certain act is good and situations in which a certain act is bad. Though I'm tempted to continue in a long rant about how glorious Krishna is for answering all these questions for us and guiding us through this rocky life by the light of his love, I think I'll let this one pass ![]() @conradw: Finally something we disagree about ![]() That does of course completely depend on what you want to think of as "the normal sense of the word". I have given my definition, if you have a different one I might agree with your conclusion depending on what that definition is. Agreed. You do realize that what I see from that sentence is "I see the arguments in favour of it (rationality), but I can't help but feel otherwise (emotion)." And when (yes I'm jumping to conclusions here) I see a statement where a rational conclusion is selected away because of emotion, I can't help but feel like calling it irrational. Let me illustrate this with a true story about assessing euthanasia: This discrepancy meant of course that one of these alternatives was wrong: Either he would be wrong to follow his sense of right and wrong and of what was more important, or he would be wrong to follow his belief system. It is of course obvious what my opinion is on this, but what is yours? |
|
Life is beautiful, love heals, people come through. Reason, compassion and love comes first. Everything else is secondary. Except for Skittles. - And emperor Cheezy!
| |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | 8 Jan 2010, 07:50 AM Post #17 |
|
Deleted User
|
simply we are not Gods so are unable to give life - so we dont have to pick up Christs cross (thank goodness-praise God) THATS WHY WE PICK UP OUR OWN CROSS and follow him- the bible says that Christs work is FINISHED we dont need to die to give others life even if were possible so sorry if i judged your judging concolor-so do you beleive the act of suicide is selfish? or do you want include feelings,motives or anything about the person at all in your answer? Though I'm tempted to continue in a long rant about how glorious God is for answering all these questions for us in the Bible and guiding us through this rocky life by the Holyspirit and his love, I think I'll wont let this one pass - THE BIBLE SAYS CHRIST DIED FOR YOU -IT SAYS HE SENT THE HOLYSPIRIT TO GUIDE AND COMFORT YOU-GOD LOVES YOU-DONT TAKE YOUR OWN LIFE BY COMMITTING SUICIDE !!! repent accept receive and beleive - death was overcome at the cross ! rant rant feels good rant and more rant ranty rant rant- |
|
|
| Junior | 8 Jan 2010, 08:18 AM Post #18 |
![]()
Brother-in-law of Soul
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Okay, here's the deal. It's all about circumstance. If you're, say, a secret agent entrusted with information that could destroy your country, and you're captured by an enemy spy, it would be your duty to bring that information to the grave IE suicide. That's the responsible side of suicide. Goes for murder too. Say you're in the army, and to protect your own life, you have to take another's. That's the responsible side of murder. God doesn't necessarily bend the rules, but he understands circumstance. |
| Call it what you want | |
![]() |
|
| Concolor | 8 Jan 2010, 04:54 PM Post #19 |
|
Barabbas
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
@Junior: Though I'm not quite sure I would pick those examples, I completely agree with your point. @ ARAZEC: Really? Give me a nice girl, true love, a good stable relationship and 9 months and I'll show you how two people can give life. So you should not follow Christ's example and be christlike? because there is no longer any need to be like Christ since he fixed everything? Please allow me to repeat myself: "To categorically label suicide as either right or wrong is in my opinion to ignore the huge differences between the many situations we would call suicide". The same goes for labeling it selfish. If you lack good examples of unselfish suicides, I suggest actually reading some of the posts in this topic Sure I could, but that would be a completely different discussion. Do you want to talk about puppies? okay that is just really cute. No really, I think I've spent too much time debating you in here. I'm getting damaged
|
|
Life is beautiful, love heals, people come through. Reason, compassion and love comes first. Everything else is secondary. Except for Skittles. - And emperor Cheezy!
| |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | 8 Jan 2010, 07:38 PM Post #20 |
|
Deleted User
|
you MAY be able to provide the physical enviorment that is so far deciphered to be required to initiate the process to bring forth conception-is that what you think i mean by "give life"? i didnt say 'fixed everything" i said "christs work is finished" We dont have to kill ourselves or any other animal as atonement for anything We dont have the ability to bear the worlds sin we follow Christ but that does not make us God Please allow me to repeat myself -we are called to PICK UP OUR OWN CROSS and follow him. lets go with this definition of suicide- •a person who kills himself intentionally how does that sound to you? i didnt ask you to say if its right or wrong You said the ACT of suicide of a single parent in hardship was a selfich ACT I wouldnt label that act as selfish-i would label it in many other ways but firstly as a tradjedy as i am sure you would too. Given a really good description of the circumstance and us much information as possible it still uncertain you can know a persons true motives-i beleive only God can. |
|
|
| AdikAko | 9 Jan 2010, 07:38 AM Post #21 |
|
Horned Rogue
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
only the residents of afterlife can answer this..... Unless the purgatory does exists i mean there might still be an undiscovered Gnostic Gospel out there |
![]() |
|
| conradw | 9 Jan 2010, 10:36 PM Post #22 |
|
Goliath
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
@Junior: That sounds awfully life relative morality - are you sure you wanna go down that road? (I only ask because that's the view I hold). @Concolor: I could put it like this: Emotionally, I think/feel life is better than death. Health is better than illness. and nine times out of ten, illness is better than death. and a bunch of other things that are too many to count. I think there is a rational case I could put forward for saying that widespread use of euthanasia could shift the balance in public opinion to a point where people feel pressured into euthanasia, or as if they are a burden rather than a valued member of society (which I don't think is healthy because of the psychological impact this would have but also implications for society more broadly). Of course it can also be selfish to insist that a dying loved one should suffer ever longer just because we can't come to terms with it. my point eventually boils down to this: Why search for better analgesics when we can simply have people die? why search for better treatment for currently incurable conditions for the same reason? - the answer may be that its because it grieves us ever time that syringe is drained. That grief should is a good thing, but would it always be there? well that is difficult to say. Interestingly, I think "passive euthanasia" is immoral - that is to say allowing nature to run its course. There is no reason why someone should be left gasping for air, starving slowly, or otherwise neglected. There is nothing noble about "nature." If you're going to do it, then DO it. |
![]() |
|
| Concolor | 10 Jan 2010, 07:34 AM Post #23 |
|
Barabbas
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
@ARAZEC:Yes, by "giving life" I mean doing everything we know is necessary to bring forth new life. Some say that it doesn't work without the flying spaghetti monster touching the embryo with his noodly appendage, but they have yet to convince me that this has anything to do with reality. I didn't say anything about being God, I said being Christlike. I assume that means reading about what Jesus did: Care for the sick, give to the poor, sacrifice himself for others. - And then try to do similar things inspired by this. What does this mean exactly? Does this not mean being Christlike in the way I described it above? How is this different from my definition: "The act of taking one's own life. Either directly and prompted, or by setting in motion events that will clearly lead to your death"? I'm asking to make sure there is no confusion. No. Absolutely not. I said it was a "despicable act of uncaring neglect". It would be a lot easier to discuss these things with you if you actually read my posts and tried to understand them. You don't even have to remember it, you can actually just scroll up and read it again while you're typing. That is true if you're investigating a murder case. We are not. We are talking about a constructed thought-experiment or example. The whole point of an example is to say that IF a situation is like this, then we can draw the following conclusions from it. If we're in math class and learning about the mathematical formula of a circle, it's entirely unhelpful that you refuse to look at the formula because you keep saying that it's really hard to draw a perfect circle (which everyone agrees, but it's not relevant to the mathematical example of a circle) @conradw: I have experienced both health and illness, and I agree that health is better than illness. That's interesting. How do you know? I have never experienced death, so I could not compare it with anything. Everyone I've heard of that have been dead and then revived have not remembered anything from the time they were dead. I have heard stories from people who have been near-death, but they are remarkably similar to the stories of many women in labor and people who are subjected to strong electromagnetic fields to certain parts of the brain. This leads me to believe that these experiences are most likely to be a result of certain stresses the body is put under in these situations. In conclusion, I cannot compare something I know with something I don't. I would object that this is a "slippery-slope"-argument, that is no more well grounded than the case for banning ropes and knives as they pressure people into committing suicide. okay, I'm overdoing it a bit. But if you have substantial arguments to put forward, please do so. I have not heard any rapports from Oregon or the Netherlands that their liberal euthanasia-policies have lead to any kinds of pressure like this. But at least in the Netherlands it has lead to a certain form of "tourism" where people from other countries travel there using their own life savings to put what they consider a worthy end to their life rather than to suffer in agonizing pain in their final hours, days, weeks or perhaps months. Yes. I think this is a vital point. Euthanasia is not about suicide by a healthy person with potential for a full life, or responsibilities for other people. It's about shortening the tormenting final days of a terminally ill patient who wants to choose for themselves how their own life should end. I may be misunderstanding you here, because I do not see your point at all. I could just as well say that today we can go "why search for treatments or analgesics, when we could just LET people die?", "why search for better treatment for currently incurable conditions when they're going to die anyway?". If you're suggesting that we're just going to go "problem solved" as soon as we're allowed to shorten the last part of a terminally ill patients life, then I don't agree. We could might as well say "problem solved" because they're gonna die anyway, and after they're dead their pain will be gone either by their consciousness disappearing, or their flesh is taken to the skies where they are reconstructed and given a blissful new existence where the old pain is irrelevant. The problem of a terminal disease is THE DYING PART. I cannot find a single source that claim that euthanasia is supposed to fix this (which it obviously won't). But today, in addition to the dying, there is also unnecessary pain and suffering, which euthanasia can fix. Suggesting that grief would somehow disappear would be to ignore the human nature. That is interesting. And I do of course completely agree. In my discussion so far, I have not considered passive euthanasia as "euthanasia". |
|
Life is beautiful, love heals, people come through. Reason, compassion and love comes first. Everything else is secondary. Except for Skittles. - And emperor Cheezy!
| |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | 10 Jan 2010, 08:48 PM Post #24 |
|
Deleted User
|
thats really long to read
|
|
|
| Concolor | 11 Jan 2010, 12:01 PM Post #25 |
|
Barabbas
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Then you should try not to bring up so many different subjects for me to answer every time you post
|
|
Life is beautiful, love heals, people come through. Reason, compassion and love comes first. Everything else is secondary. Except for Skittles. - And emperor Cheezy!
| |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | 11 Jan 2010, 02:27 PM Post #26 |
|
Deleted User
|
oh sorry !Spoiler: click to toggle |
|
|
| Concolor | 11 Jan 2010, 03:40 PM Post #27 |
|
Barabbas
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
UNAC ? |
|
Life is beautiful, love heals, people come through. Reason, compassion and love comes first. Everything else is secondary. Except for Skittles. - And emperor Cheezy!
| |
![]() |
|
| conradw | 12 Jan 2010, 11:57 AM Post #28 |
|
Goliath
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Actually, I didn't want to mention this because I haven't read the reports properly (and so I don't feel I am in a position to make an informed judgement) but as I understand it, the Netherlands has experienced problems with its implementation of euthanasia. I recognise the problems with slippery slope arguments, in fact I often say that as soon as you start talking about the "slippery slope" before long you'll have Nazis riding dinosaurs in the streets (- Do you WANT Nazis riding dinosaurs in the streets???). However, in the case of the Netherlands, euthanasia is no longer being used solely in cases of people with intractable illness etc. but even for people who simply wish to die. I tend to know hype when I see it, and in all honesty, I see it here especially when people use words like "Euthanasia in the Netherlands is out of control." You have to take a lot of what is said with a pinch of salt, but whether or not euthanasia has been a success in the netherlands is controversial. As for deciding what is better between illness and death. I have experienced what is probably the closest thing we can do to death: general anaesthesia. Being ill is better than being unconscious at least in my experience. Being under a general anaesthetic is not the same as being asleep, or passed out: it is *nothing*. I understand how this could be preferable for some people, but for most people I don't think it is. My 9 times out of 10 is a completely frivolous number. In short, I want euthanasia to be the exception rather than the rule. |
![]() |
|
| Concolor | 12 Jan 2010, 01:38 PM Post #29 |
|
Barabbas
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
@conradw: Ah, so we disagree about the facts. Let the rational discourse begin! Phase 1: Gathering and presenting data. (or at least third-party investigations) Belgium: http://journals.lww.com/lww-medicalcare/Abstract/publishahead/Legal_Euthanasia_in_Belgium__Characteristics_of.99853.aspx http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/361/11/1119 The Netherlands: http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/abstract/356/19/1957?ijkey=44e86a389a327aa96e20b1c72811d669a5a5c9a6&keytype2=tf_ipsecsha I would be more inclined to call the situation in The Netherlands "uneventful" than "out of control", and the situation in Belgium as a sign of this offer slowly gaining acceptance in the public after it's legislation. That would be cool in a very special way, but it would probably be for the best if that didn't happen. It has been so from the very beginning (as far as I understand). If anything the numbers point to a decline in active euthanasia as more people choose retractment of treatment or palliative sedation. I've been there too. It is not death. My heart was beating, lungs were breathing, and though I don't know this for sure I would assume a certain brain activity as well. But the experience is how I imagine the experience of death to be. Nothing. And if you didn't like it, then you weren't completely sedated. Because if you had been, you wouldn't have been able to judge whether you liked it or not. For me, the whole period is simply removed from my life. As if the time period had been cut away by a team of editor's. I thought nothing, I felt nothing. But what separates this from death, is that this experience was not final. I woke up again. And what I DO have thoughts and feelings about is the experience of having a hole in my life. An experience I would not have unless I had woke up. And come to think about it, I WOULD actually prefer to have that bit of my life cut out rather than to have been awake and in pain during my surgery. That's sort of what general anaesthesia is all about. But wery few are against it. And If we are OK about cutting away a bit of our life because it is painful and tormenting in the middle of our lives, (and we don't remember the painful beginning of our lives anyway), why are we so eager to oppose those who wish to do the same at the end of their life? In short, I want each of us to govern the end of our lives as freely as we govern the rest of our lives, and for those who do not prefer euthanasia to be free to die as they wish and those who prefer it to choose their own death. |
|
Life is beautiful, love heals, people come through. Reason, compassion and love comes first. Everything else is secondary. Except for Skittles. - And emperor Cheezy!
| |
![]() |
|
Luemas
|
12 Jan 2010, 05:46 PM Post #30 |
![]()
DELICIOUS!
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Conrad... I'm sorry. I really am. Godwin's law. |
|
I think I'm Crazzzy. I think your crazy. I think your crazzzy... probably. | |
![]() |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Debate · Next Topic » |




![]](http://z4.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)






!
.gif)

6:46 PM Jul 10