0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
"There is a balm in Gilead to make the wounded whole.."It really is a powerful hymn. I just listened to it and it has removed most of the taint one feels in corresponding with you.
I have, indeed, seen the "balm of Gilead" working. Mr. Calverd, you and your friends here have made it abundantly clear that you lack the rudimentary spiritual resources of the Neanderthals.In consequence, the vicissitudes of life give you all an aggravated case of the chronic collywobbles. You all cover this up with a load of flippant and supercilious smartass as a compensation for your profound despair.I have spent over 40 years in medicine. Nobody can do that without gaining knowledge of the divine mysteries of life. One gains that knowledge through dealing with the harsh realities of life that you "scientific" wallahs lack the spittle for." The world of dew is the world of dew. And yet, and yet--" Kobayashi Issa
If Mr. Calverd or any of the moderators here think they are my God, then it is time one of their friends took them out back and set them straight.Mr. Calverd had the temerity to mock my religion. I hope either you or he lives to see the day that I would abide such insufferable behavior and tug my forelock and remain silent.Gentlemen, even Gentlemen in England, even atheistic Gentlemen in England, do not do that. It is not admirable. It is, in fact, pure Jeremy Clarkson style beneath-the-salt gaucherie.I am well aware of England's current intolerance of dissenting voices. If I cannot discuss this matter without having my religious beliefs ridiculed by some "scientific" unholy and profane "gentleman" then this forum can take its phony imposture of "civility" and blow it out its phony, ridiculous, and atheistic nose.Finally, as to your brave new atheistic world, Mr. High Pockets....Winter is coming.
Mr. Calverd, you and your friends here have made it abundantly clear that you lack the rudimentary spiritual resources of the Neanderthals.
I have spent over 40 years in medicine.
Mr. Calverd had the temerity to mock my religion.
“In Numbers 31:15-18, after his soldiers had killed all of the men among the Midianites, Moses ordered his army officers to kill all of the male children, kill all of the nonvirgin females but to save alive all of the virgin girls for his troops. Prior to this, the Israelites had taken all of the animals and goods of the Midianites and then burned all of their towns. If genocide or "ethnic cleansing" is a war crime, then this act of Moses was clearly a war crime…What possible reason could Moses have given in order to justify this horrendous act of genocide? After all, wasn't he the great "law giver"? Moses claimed that Yahweh, the God of Israel, ordered him to do this, because the Midianites worshiped a deity named Baal Peor. The Midianites felt that Baal Peor was nature's god, the creator of the universe, whereas the Israelites believed that their god Yahweh was the creator. .. So, in effect, what we have here is a demonization of those people who refer to the creator by a different name. These people are accused of worshiping a false god.
"Then stand up and defend your religion" and at least, tell all of us why it is OK for "God" to murder little innocent boys and commit genocide against he Midianite people by proxy
through kind gentle Moses as depicted in Numbers 31
Getting back to the subject of the thread I think euthanasia should only be used of those who have made it very clear while still in control of all their mental faculties that it is their expressed wish that this final act of love and mercy be done for them when they no longer have the means to do it for themselves.
Mr. Calverd had the temerity to mock my religion. I hope either you or he lives to see the day that I would abide such insufferable behavior and tug my forelock and remain silent.
Gentlemen, even Gentlemen in England, even atheistic Gentlemen in England, do not do that. It is not admirable. It is, in fact, pure Jeremy Clarkson style beneath-the-salt gaucherie.
I am well aware of England's current intolerance of dissenting voices. If I cannot discuss this matter without having my religious beliefs ridiculed by some "scientific" unholy and profane "gentleman" then this forum can take its phony imposture of "civility" and blow it out its phony, ridiculous, and atheistic nose.
Finally, as to your brave new atheistic world, Mr. High Pockets....Winter is coming.
“I should have thought,” said the officer as he visualized the searchbefore him, “I should have thought that a pack of British boys—you’re allBritish, aren’t you?—would have been able to put up a better show thanthat—I mean—”-- Lord of the Flies
IAMREALITYI plagiarized nothing just copied something identical to what I wrote out of my own head I was so desperately trying to get over "in different wording" to get him to address the appalling cruelty as depicted in Numbers 31No one would be interested in the link other than you who tries to find fault in everything I do or say, stop it for 'Gods sake" Please stop trying to make trouble between us again , we have managed a few posts without it until this latest post of yours.Alan
Gentle Readers,It was asked of me why I am "obsessed" with the British.If I am obsessed with anything it is the depraved, specious contention that a valid case may be made for murdering Alzheimer's patients.I am all too aware of this forum's de facto policy of disappearing anybody who disagrees effectively with the "scientific" cant of the honorable "hero Members". A glance through the threads of this forum will show this to be the case. Where are the dissenting voices of yesteryear?Such a question as "mercy killing" of the infirm has not existed outside of extremist nut jobs on this planet since the fall of Berlin in 1945.It speaks to the shame of modern Britain that it is now promulgated here in this government funded new-speak forum for three pages....so far.J' accuse.
If I am obsessed with anything it is the depraved, specious contention that a valid case may be made for murdering Alzheimer's patients.
For sake of the spirit of the thread, I agree that Alzheimers is horrible due to what it does to a person, diminishing them to merely a shell of themselves, their minds almost no longer present at all. And it takes a lifetime of pride, of one putting effort into themselves to come across best they can, present themselves best they can, to grow as a person best they can and to hold their heads high through good times and bad best they can, and reduces them to something they'd be so ashamed of or embarrassed of if they had their wits about them (though it's not their fault and there is no shame!). I for one, would most certainly be grateful to my loved ones for sparing me from such a fate. No, Alan, I would not want to end my days under the horrors of that disease either. In that we agree. And I find the discussion to absolutely have merit, if assisted suicide is called for in such situations. I actually would consider it to be one of the most humane and gracious things that can be done. And though I always think suicide is the right of any individual, I do not always find it to be honorable, and oftentimes actually selfish and short sighted. What might not be known here is that I've actually saved many from committing such an act throughout my life, and have several that say they owe their lives to me and are so grateful, because they since have gone on to have families, or become successful, or have gotten through the dark time, and realize the mistake they would've made. Hell, I'm one of those people myself. The whole iamreality moniker started after a suicide attempt I was hell bent on. After the attempt was unsuccessful (won't go into details), I was left with a mental strength I hadn't had before, a clear voice in the middle of my head that I've been able to tap into ever since for wisdom and logic. And it's since helped many others. But that's cause suicide most often is a rash and impulsive decision and the bigger picture isn't seen. In most of those cases it simply wouldn't be the right thing to do. But in cases such as this, such as what is being discussed here, there would absofrigginlutely be honor and legitimacy in the act. It wouldn't be rash, impulsive nor short sighted. It would be the most logical and reasonable of desires that would be at the root; the desire to die representing who we were in life, with the dignity and grace that should go along with it. Yes, it is a reasonable, credible, humane, decent and intelligent option to be on the table, and on the table it should be, for everyone.
My step Grandmother died due to not drinking water for the last week of her life.Whilst she was a horrid person, not a wet eye at the funeral, I would not wish such a death on anybody at all. Surely in circumstances where we put to sleep a dog in missery without all this ethical fuss it is similarly clear in 99% of the times that it would have been a lot better to have doen the same to the old lady rather than allow her demented and lost mind to neglect her own body to death.
She was lucky to have a choice. "The Liverpool Care Pathway" is a euphemism for killing by deliberate dehydration and malnutrition in a hospital. Obviously it can only be applied to people who are incoherent and unable to fend for themselves , so once it has been prescribed, it is a good idea to sedate the patient and thus maintain incoherence and incapacity until clinical death - which may take days or weeks.I cannot understand why this is ethically preferable to nitrogen hypoxia - 5 minutes of euphoria and a painless death. ...sorry, you cannot view external links. To see them, please
REGISTER or LOGIN is splendidly detailed, but you can skip to "The Effects of Hypoxia at Various Altitudes" and consider the effect of being transported to 25,000 ft quickly without the discomfort of decompression. But it still doesn't address the question of establishing the patient's wishes.
Since we seem not to die from communicable disease or minor trauma these days, and more people each day are surviving cancer and heart disease, everyone is a potential Alzheimer patient. I consider it the hallmark of a civilised society that everyone should be able to choose the time, place and method of his death. So my draft proposal has four essential parts:1. Anyone can make a "living will" to specify the circumstances in which he wants to be killed, and this must be given the same legal status as a property will. That is, it can be challenged on grounds of coercion or insanity, must be legally executable, and must nominate a willing executor to carry out the wishes expressed. 2. Where such a will exists, it is the duty of the person's medical carers to bring it to the notice of the executor (and vice versa) if it appears that the conditions are or shortly will be met.3.The executor must present the will and the medical case to an independent ethics tribunal competent to weigh the medical evidence against the conditions set out in the will. 4. If the tribunal agrees that the conditions are met, the executor must arrange for a licensed practitioner to carry out the euthanasia in a timely manner. The object of all this is to ensure that, on the one hand, a trusted friend or family member is fully involved in the process, but on the other hand, there can be no hint of coercion or medical convenience in the decision. Evidence to the tribunal should be anonymised to ensure independence. In the absence of a trusted individual, the will can specify the State "duty executor" - a branch of the Office of the Public Guardian with legal but not medical expertise.In answer to the inevitable "who would be willing to serve in any of these roles?", I would consider it an honour to investigate and carry out the expressed wish of a citizen in irreversible distress, and I don't think I'd be alone in volunteering.