The Forum > Article Comments > The choice illusion > Comments
The choice illusion : Comments
By Paul Russell, published 6/1/2012With euthanasia there is no real choice for the patient.
- Pages:
-
- Page 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- ...
- 9
- 10
- 11
-
- All
Posted by michael_in_adelaide, Friday, 6 January 2012 8:09:50 AM
| |
I guess as a director of an organisation fighting voluntary
euthanasia etc, the author has to try and think of some credible arguments to make his case, that would be what he would be paid to do, I would think. A far more enlightened argument, a far more humane philosophy, is explained here by a doctor involved with Exit in Switzerland, where assisted suicide works extremely well. http://www.exit-geneve.ch/Exempleoas.pdf But then our thinking in Australia is years behind. Eventually even we will have to concede that torturing old people in the name of religious dogma, often against their will, is hardly the humane option. Buying a used car has little to do with it. Posted by Yabby, Friday, 6 January 2012 8:29:28 AM
| |
>>But what if you never wanted to buy a car in the first place?<<
Then you wouldn't buy a used car. No salesman can sell you a used car if you don't want to buy it. In exactly the same way that no doctor will be allowed to kill their patient without that patient's consent. If they were to do that, it wouldn't be euthanasia: it would be murder. Paul, we already know that murder is wrong - you're just preaching to the choir. Maybe you should write an article explaining why euthanasia is wrong, bearing foremost in your mind at all times the extremely important distinction between murder and euthanasia. Posted by Anton LaVey, Friday, 6 January 2012 9:01:33 AM
| |
michael_in_adelaide: Once again euthanasia is being confused with assisted suicide.
I agree with Michael. Voluntry assisted suicide is a CHOICE made by the person who wants to end the pain & suffering. Euthanasia is being "put down" as in, "There is no choice by the person." However, turning of the life support is not Euthanasia as the person is already dead & the electrics in the body keep parts of the body functioning. I have watched a number of people die when the attendant swiched off the machines. These people were already dead & the machines kept the electrical system working & pumping air rythmicly into the lungs until the relatives have all said their goodbyes, then the attendants slowly turns the machine down until the persons responces go. Then they switch it off. It's a bit of an illusion really. But that's the reality of it. Posted by Jayb, Friday, 6 January 2012 10:17:57 AM
| |
Yabby
My objection to euthanasia uses the same reasoning as my support of abortion. Both situations involve the extrapolation of time to a person in the future. With abortion you are destroying a potential human being in the present, but with euthanasia you are authorising the killing a human being in the future. Do you think it valid for a future self to be dictated to by a past or future self not in existence, or should the decision be made by one of sound mind in the present? The present is the present, not the future. We exist only in the present. Posted by Fester, Friday, 6 January 2012 10:24:18 AM
| |
Fester, please take the time to read the Swiss article and then
explain what you object to, about their system. Thanks. Posted by Yabby, Friday, 6 January 2012 10:35:50 AM
|
None of us have the choice to live forever but we CAN choose the time and manner of our death (if we are lucky).
The ability to choose to die is one of the things that defines us as human. No other animal can do it. To deny us this choice is, in my opinion, a crime against our humanity.