The Forum > General Discussion > Euthanasia debate on SBS
Euthanasia debate on SBS
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
-
- All
Posted by Yabby, Tuesday, 3 April 2007 10:42:33 PM
| |
Yes Yabby, I too watched the SBS Insight programme on Euthanasia and was totally disgusted with the obvious Religious Right (perhaps that should be rite) who peddled their own theological convictions about life and death without a thought for the people who wanted to make up their own minds over what they wanted to do with their own life. If I am of a sound mind, how dare someone else make it up for me and prosecute anyone who helps me or gives me advice on how to relieve my suffering, should it come to pass. The excuse that political legislation could not drawn up to legitimately cover any deceptive exploitation, is utterly ridiculous.
Posted by snake, Wednesday, 4 April 2007 10:00:31 AM
| |
Snake, thanks for your post, I fully agree with you.
If Abbott, Andrews, Pyne, Pell and others, think its noble that they be tortured by nature on their deathbeds, well thats their choice. My point is, they have no right to force their religious dogma down the throats of the rest of us, more normal people. Last I saw, by far the majority of Australians are for voluntary euthanasia. Politicians are meant to represent the overall view of their constituents, not force their religious dogma down our throats. Hopefully some of those politicians and political operatives who are forcing our most frail to suffer on their deathbeds, will get their own share of medicine, when their turn comes. Serves them right for their lack of compassion and arrogance. Shame on them. Posted by Yabby, Wednesday, 4 April 2007 10:11:23 PM
| |
One way to bring some sense and compassion to the present unjust situation:
"Too 'cruel' to jail pair for killing son Wednesday Apr 4 16:36 AEST A Sydney couple who killed their blind, disabled son out of love and desperation were released on good behaviour bonds on Wednesday after a judge ruled it would be "cruel" to jail them. Prosecutors had called for prison terms for Margaret and Raymond Sutton, who pleaded guilty to the manslaughter of their 28-year-old son, Matthew. But Supreme Court Justice Graham Barr said the Suttons had devoted their lives to Matthew's care and "even the last act was one born of love for him". http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=167784&_cobr=optus In another trial a few years ago, the doctor and two relatives of a deceased person were charged with murder. The circumstances were such that it appeared likely that they had been involved in an act of merciful voluntary euthanasia. The jury acquitted the defendants, and the prosecution declined to appeal. The prosecution must have realised what they were up against. I know that if I was on a jury hearing such a case, I would never support a "guilty" verdict, regardless of the circumstances, and I would do my very best to convince other jury members to side with me on this. With approx 70/80% of Australians known to support voluntary euthanasia, automatic verdicts of not guilty could become the norm, and would be generally seen as a wonderful example of people power. Posted by Rex, Friday, 6 April 2007 3:52:01 PM
| |
Good to hear that our legal system hasnt been completely over-run by religious ignorance . . . . . yet.
Posted by RigPig, Saturday, 7 April 2007 1:36:53 AM
| |
I too was disgusted by Christopher Pyne's attitude. Not only did I disagree with his stand that euthanasia was wrong and that "he would never support it" (indicating a closed mind, not willing to listen to any argument, no matter what), but his conceated attitude.
He vertually said that Australians are generally not smart enough to know what they really want (80% of Australians in polls support euthanasia); they elect wise politicians (like hime) to govern us and give us what we need, even if it is not what we think we need. How patronising! Posted by Dave Clarke, Saturday, 7 April 2007 6:15:17 AM
| |
Just wondering when the public will rise up against these church dictators once and for all.
While they walk on their higher moral ground they are making life even more difficult for those who need help. Yes it terribly people have to go overseas to die with dignity. Most people know I usually post on animal welfare and my utter discust at the lack of Church Leaders concerns for God creatures. A few days ago I got a reply from the head of the Salvation Army when I demanded to know why they showed no leadership towards Gods creatures. I was sent something on abortion and Euthanasia for goodness sake. Well Neil as far as I am concerned it would be hard to inflict anywhere near the suffering on something that is unborn and less than the size of a grain of rice as what you saw on 60 minutes or one of Amandas piggerys. How dare you Church People then say Euthanasia is wrong. Its none of your business what people wish to do when they are terminaly ill and suffering unbareable pain. Open your eyes and look at the millions born only to suffer of starvation. All in the name of your stupid church. SHAME As far as I am concerned if this is the way you think God wanted it your a bunch of dick heads that WE the People should make it our business to get rid of you all. Now you lot are getting more and more involved in politics I can assure you thats got to be a good option from the way I see it. I dont beleive God meant us to be that creul to either his creatures or dying people. I just think your a backward bunch of jerks that need to be disposed of. Wake up and live in this century before some of these more educated uni kids take over with new church organisations. No wonder the young and educated have not followed the Church. Your cruel stupid and arrogant. Let the sick have their Euthanasia Here In peace Posted by People Against Live Exports & Intensive Farming, Tuesday, 10 April 2007 1:41:16 AM
| |
Another point about euthanasia is the lack of a standard by the government. The United States, for an example, allows the capital punishment and prohibits the euthanasia. Euthanasia from the ancient Greek means "Good death,” and it includes all kind of deaths, regardless if it is either conscious or unconscious. The country calls us as free, the freedom land. For me, at least, it means that I have the right of free will, and if they give me the right to live, I also have the right of die implicit.
It also brings us another important point: the pride. It is unfair with someone who has had a successful life die after being kept alive because of machines. For last, it is even less unfair with the relatives of this person to have as the last memory of this person in a bed, suffering because of those old moralities such as the prohibition of euthanasia. The times change. It is time to change our concepts too. Posted by batoradaudt, Saturday, 27 October 2007 11:50:03 PM
|
I can say is "Christopher Pyne -get stuffed"
I really don't care what you or your Govt claim is legal
or illegal. Its an absolute disgrace, that some Aussies
have to travel to Switzerland, to die with dignity.
A young whippersnapper like you can think what he likes,
but some of us are tiered of the Catholic influence on
liberal politics.
The Catholics might well claim that suffering is dignified,
I happen to disagree. I care more about the suffering of
my dog, then most seem to care about human suffering.
When her time comes, my dog will die peacefully and without
pain, unlike many humans.
Shame on this Govt for not allowing people to make free choices
about their lives, which is what liberalism should be all about.
You have certainly lost my vote.