Dr. Kevorkian to run for Congress.......

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by somerfrost

Of course it's not that simple...it never is! It's like abortion, and lets not go down that road again so Mersameg can say I'm not a feminist. Here's the thing, I believe all life is sacred...I oppose abortion, euthanasia, capital punishment, and all other forms of legalized "death by others" (notice I refrain from using the word "murder" to not stoke the fire). Of course the last thing in this world I want is to see ANYBODY suffer! I no longer support reversing Roe, nor do I support any criminalization of suicide. In regards to Roe, it's useless to close the barn door, the horses have long since run away...my objection is the government "legalizing" abortion. Had it been simply "decriminalized" and left to the woman, it wouldn't have had the sociological impact of lessening the value of life. Euthanasia is indeed a "slippery slope"...who decides who has the right to take their life? Does a 16 year old who just broke up with the "love of his/her life?" How about the 19 year old suffering from schizophrenia? The 30 year old who lost a child? The 40 year old struggling through a lifetime of depression? The 50 year old cancer patient? Is pain the criteria? How much pain? Who decides?? If it's the person then that's where free will and consequences for personal behavior come in...but if the government "legalizes" euthanasia then we're one step closer to eating Soilent Green! Do we want to live in a society where "death parlors" are on every corner like McD's? When will folks understand that you can't legislate morality and the government has no right in the private affairs of people? I live by the Rede and it says, "and ye harm none, do what ye will"...so I will never take my own life through any physical act and I'm damn well opposed to others making that decision for me. What you decide is governed by your faith, circumstance, and belief....I am responsible for what I do, and you are likewise...keep the damn government out of it!

I think I was pretty specific about when I thought euthanasia is a black and white situation. You seemed to take it down the slippery slope to areas where I think it isn't so black and white. But, and I'm not lumping you into this catgory, many like you do that with issues. The NRA comes to mind right away. But you did it this time with your examples of a kid breaking up, schitzo, etc. That wasn't even part of the conversation or was ever remotely considered or proposed that I have ever heard of

I guess I was confused because you started out, I think, saying you oppose what Kivorkian did, but then say that the end "I'm damn well opposed to others making that decision for me"?

[dr. fager]

Originally Posted by somerfrost

I believe all life is sacred...

So you've never put a pet down?

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by Cajungator26

Kind of a low blow, B. As a Christian (this has nothing to do with politics-I wish you'd quit dogging me for being a Republican), I believe that another human being should not assist in the death of another. It's murder. You keep using the word "force", but he's not forcing them to do anything. If a person wants to commit suicide, that is their prerogative, but another person should not be involved in that. JMO.

Oh come on, what do you mean "quit," like I do it all the time. When was the last time I seriously bothered to even get into one of these discussions? It's not like I chase you around and give you **** on a regular basis.

And my "low blow" was a riff on the theme of "we are here to bring you peace *drops bombs every****ingwhere*"

Regardless of the word "force," the point is that in a physician-assisted suicide, folks can have some sense of closure for their families as well, in a controlled environment. Read up on the Death with Dignity work they do in Oregon, it's brilliant. These people are able to bring their families into the process, families who are watching them suffer terribly. They are able to have an appropriate goodbye, and often these families are able to spend the last moments of life with their ailing family members. There is a stark difference between that, and sending someone an email that says "can you come wipe my brain off the wall sometime after 2pm today?" To me, there is an incredibly important distinction of 'dignity' in the way someone kills themself. If you don't allow someone to have a professional assist them in a painless, clean way, then you are yes, forcing them to do something potentially more harmful and more painful and less peaceful.

While I'm getting riled up about it, Bob is absolutely right on what the bread and butter of this issue is -- and I've gone somewhat off-topic.

If I am dying, who gets to tell me what to do with my body? You? Or me?

That's the worldview difference here. I think I get to choose what to do with myself. You think you do.

[somerfrost]

Originally Posted by GBBob

I think I was pretty specific about when I thought euthanasia is a black and white situation. You seemed to take it down the slippery slope to areas where I think it isn't so black and white. But, and I'm not lumping you into this catgory, many like you do that with issues. The NRA comes to mind right away. But you did it this time with your examples of a kid breaking up, schitzo, etc. That wasn't even part of the conversation or was ever remotely considered or proposed that I have ever heard of

I guess I was confused because you started out, I think, saying you oppose what Kivorkian did, but then say that the end "I'm damn well opposed to others making that decision for me"?

I don't understand??? His entire "platform" is the legalization of euthanasia...I think I was pretty clear on why I oppose same??? Again, accusing me of this or that does little to address the argument imo.

[Mortimer]

Do you all see why I hate people now?

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by somerfrost

I'm neither a republican or a Christian...reducing an argument to it's simplist terms is often beneficial in science...seldom in life. Your attitude that opposition to euthanasia = heartlessness and a desire to see folks suffer is repulsive!

Much as I find your opposition to physican-assisted suicide.

We'll have to call it a draw.

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by GBBob

Why because ALS isn't terminal enough or because he videotaped it so could be on 60 Minutes?

No, because the patient wasn't the one to press the button. In his other cases, he assisted by providing the means, but he wasn't the one to actually do it.

Speaking of ALS...

http://web.alsa.org/goto/cajungator26

A good friend of mine at work is dying and we're walking on April 19th...

[Mortimer]

This place is mekin' me sick!




You all have to bring in real life here....I hate it.


I will not join in on bashing and smashing over something like this...life's unfair----boy do we all know that.


Whatever it says....I'm also sick of donations!


Everybody wants donations.....Jesus!

Give here...give there....make another bourgois swine rich over a poor soul.






I think you're all crazy and I'm leaving.........no eyerollers,please.



Too much seriousness here.

[somerfrost]

Originally Posted by dr. fager

So you've never put a pet down?

Again, what I have or have not done is not the point...to repeat, I have free will and I make decisions and live with the consequences. Have I put a pet down? Yes, but not without much personal agony. I believe animals have souls but I also believe that man has dominion over animals...not so other human beings. If my dog could communicate with me, I would honor his/her request but since they can't, I make the decision...and I accept any consequences. That's my point here...if a person decides to end their life, they are responsible for that act; if someone else decides to end it for them, they are responsible for same. Having the government legalize the act removes the responsibility legally but not morally and at the same time sends a clear message about the sanctity of life!

[dr. fager]

Originally Posted by somerfrost

If my dog could communicate with me, I would honor his/her request but since they can't, I make the decision...and I accept any consequences. That's my point here...if a person decides to end their life, they are responsible for that act; if someone else decides to end it for them, they are responsible for same.

that wasn't personal that was euthanasia for pets, I should have generalized.

but it still doesn't add up, if a dog could talk you'd honor the request....but if a person asks you wouldn't....

consequences, huh? like that bootleg move of picking up Willie Parker and stooping to the level of the idiots in the fantasy league when you were up against someone that was playing by the rules.....

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by dr. fager

that wasn't personal that was euthanasia for pets, I should have generalized.

but it still doesn't add up, if a dog could talk you'd honor the request....but if a person asks you wouldn't....

consequences, huh? like that bootleg move of picking up Willie Parker and stooping to the level of the idiots in the fantasy league when you were up against someone that was playing by the rules.....

the first segue from Euthanasia to fantasy football ever noted

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by somerfrost

I don't understand??? His entire "platform" is the legalization of euthanasia...I think I was pretty clear on why I oppose same??? Again, accusing me of this or that does little to address the argument imo.

ok..I'll try and narrow this further..Yes, I think euthanasia should be legal for people with terminal illnesses. To get more specific about the rules, reference Brian's Oregon laws. They have it structured so it is absolutely black and white.

Do you agree with the above? Or not...I really am not sure

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by dr. fager

but it still doesn't add up, if a dog could talk you'd honor the request....but if a person asks you wouldn't....

You must remember that dogs are different than people.

People need to be told what to do, but dogs could make up their own minds.

Or maybe it's just on a case-by-case basis, and Somer inadvertantly forget to tell us that the dog he was specifically talking about was this one, and would therefore have been qualified to make decisions for himself.

[SentToStud]

I'm with B.W.S. on this. If they could do it themselves, they would.

Live and let live. Or, otherwise.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by GBBob

ok..I'll try and narrow this further..Yes, I think euthanasia should be legal for people with terminal illnesses. To get more specific about the rules, reference Brian's Oregon laws. They have it structured so it is absolutely black and white.

Do you agree with the above? Or not...I really am not sure

Let's all be clear here too, the use of the term "euthanasia" is wildly misleading and intellectually dishonest in this discussion. Euthanasia is still illegal in Oregon.

Q: How does a patient get a prescription from a participating physician?

A: The patient must meet certain criteria to be able to request to participate in the Act. Then, the following steps must be fulfilled: 1) the patient must make two oral requests to the attending physician, separated by at least 15 days; 2) the patient must provide a written request to the attending physician, signed in the presence of two witnesses, at least one of whom is not related to the patient; 3) the attending physician and a consulting physician must confirm the patient's diagnosis and prognosis; 4) the attending physician and a consulting physician must determine whether the patient is capable of making and communicating health care decisions for him/herself; 5) if either physician believes the patient's judgment is impaired by a psychiatric or psychological disorder (such as depression), the patient must be referred for a psychological examination; 6) the attending physician must inform the patient of feasible alternatives to the Act including comfort care, hospice care, and pain control; 7) the attending physician must request, but may not require, the patient to notify their next-of-kin of the prescription request. A patient can rescind a request at any time and in any manner. The attending physician will also offer the patient an opportunity to rescind his/her request at the end of the 15-day waiting period following the initial request to participate.

Q: Does the Act allow euthanasia?

A: No. Euthanasia is a different procedure for hastening death. In euthanasia, a doctor injects a patient with a lethal dosage of medication. In the Act, a physician prescribes a lethal dose of medication to a patient, but the patient - not the doctor - administers the medication. Euthanasia is illegal in every state in the US, including Oregon. The Act has been legal in Oregon since November 1997.


The latter question addresses why Kevorkian crossed the line with Youk, and got in trouble for it, as I would be willing to say, he should have.

[dr. fager]

Originally Posted by GBBob

the first segue from Euthanasia to fantasy football ever noted

threads like this need some levity....in my eyes....

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by somerfrost

Again, what I have or have not done is not the point...to repeat, I have free will and I make decisions and live with the consequences. Have I put a pet down? Yes, but not without much personal agony. I believe animals have souls but I also believe that man has dominion over animals...not so other human beings. If my dog could communicate with me, I would honor his/her request but since they can't, I make the decision...and I accept any consequences. That's my point here...if a person decides to end their life, they are responsible for that act; if someone else decides to end it for them, they are responsible for same. Having the government legalize the act removes the responsibility legally but not morally and at the same time sends a clear message about the sanctity of life!

I dont think you understand what assisted suicide is. People who are in too much pain or do not have the functions to commit it, but want to end their pain, have someone like Dr. K assist them.

You saying "if someone else dicides to end it for them" is completely off base because the assistant is NOT deciding this, they are just helping with someones wishes.

I really have no idea how you and Cajun dont get this.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Didn't "UNCLE BILL" shoot himself? You people saying that's cool,but if you're in a hospital ya gotta suffer until you hallucinate etc.?

[somerfrost]

Originally Posted by dr. fager

that wasn't personal that was euthanasia for pets, I should have generalized.

but it still doesn't add up, if a dog could talk you'd honor the request....but if a person asks you wouldn't....

consequences, huh? like that bootleg move of picking up Willie Parker and stooping to the level of the idiots in the fantasy league when you were up against someone that was playing by the rules.....

Again, you miss the point....if my dog asked me to end his life and I saw he was suffering, I would...and I would accept any and all consequences for my action. If a person asked me...I would have to make a PERSONAL decision, how could I (or even you) know what I (or you) would do? I am opposed to the concept and would never take my own life, nor would I be so demanding of another to ask them to do so, but if I was placed in that situation by someone else...well, then the decision would be mine alone to make....therein lies my point, it would be MY responsibility not the government's...and, if I did do what was requested of me, I would do so against my beliefs and with the expectation that I would pay the consequences! Life is about decisions and the consequences of making them...and Willie Parker broke his leg immediately after I picked him up and placed him in my lineup so I paid the price of losing 20 + points that week...exactly what I deserved!

[somerfrost]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

I dont think you understand what assisted suicide is. People who are in too much pain or do not have the functions to commit it, but want to end their pain, have someone like Dr. K assist them.

You saying "if someone else dicides to end it for them" is completely off base because the assistant is NOT deciding this, they are just helping with someones wishes.

I really have no idea how you and Cajun dont get this.

Again, you are simplifying a complex issue....DR K has free will like the rest of us...he made the decision to end someone's life and he alone is responsible for the consequences. Just because someone asks you to do something changes nothing about free will...you, and you alone, make the decision! I worked 35 years with mentally ill folks and folks in all kinds of pain...seen far more suffering than anyone should have to...to suggest that I don't care about folk's pain is just wrong! When I worked in Piney Mt Nursing Home as Director of Soc Services, the first battle I fought was that the home REQUIRED every new admission to have a living will and that doctors...IN MY PRESENCE would often call family members and literally demand that they, as power of attorney, change wills that requested "heroic mesures" to DNR orders...if that's not deciding for someone, often against their expressed desires, I don't know what is??? And that is without government sanctioned euthanasia! Forgive me if I see this as somewhat forbodding!