-
Reply #15
by (QC) Spell Bound on 28 Jan, 2013 19:29
-
I would never let the government take care of my own body if it had to be them to decide my faith, it's me and just me.
The only reason why the authorities won't allow it is because it's classified as suicide.
I.M.O , a person suffering from immense pains has his own choice to make, if he isn't capale of making one, doesn't mean you make it for him ( Varies from case to case).
-
Reply #16
by UnknownError on 28 Jan, 2013 20:06
-
The only substantial reason a government could deny euthanasia, if the patient was under a government healthcare plan, which I think Canada is ?(No private health care insurers) Correct me if I'm wrong there. Someone who doesn't believe in euthanasia shouldn't have to pay for it through their taxes.
-
Reply #17
by (QC) Spell Bound on 28 Jan, 2013 20:32
-
The only substantial reason a government could deny euthanasia, if the patient was under a government healthcare plan, which I think Canada is ?(No private health care insurers) Correct me if I'm wrong there. Someone who doesn't believe in euthanasia shouldn't have to pay for it through their taxes.
Doesn't work that way, the taxes you pay for your health care plan is the money you keep paying from the day you get health insurance, this doesn't decide your faith, it's only you, your family or the doctor. The government only cares about whats legal and illegal, they won't go further by deciding someone's faith, unless it doesn't work that way in other countries.
-
Reply #18
by Inject OH 4 on 29 Jan, 2013 17:23
-
The only substantial reason a government could deny euthanasia, if the patient was under a government healthcare plan, which I think Canada is ?(No private health care insurers) Correct me if I'm wrong there. Someone who doesn't believe in euthanasia shouldn't have to pay for it through their taxes.
We have red cross if that's what your asking?
But btw It's illegal in America to. It's an moral/ethical issue that society hasn't agreed upon yet. That's the reason I see it as being how it is.
-
Reply #19
by Cortez (Mr. T. FOO!) on 30 Jan, 2013 11:36
-
The only substantial reason a government could deny euthanasia, if the patient was under a government healthcare plan, which I think Canada is ?(No private health care insurers) Correct me if I'm wrong there. Someone who doesn't believe in euthanasia shouldn't have to pay for it through their taxes.
We have red cross if that's what your asking?
But btw It's illegal in America to. It's an moral/ethical issue that society hasn't agreed upon yet. That's the reason I see it as being how it is.
There are about a hundred more private health care ensures than red cross.
-
Reply #20
by Inject OH 4 on 01 Feb, 2013 11:47
-
The only substantial reason a government could deny euthanasia, if the patient was under a government healthcare plan, which I think Canada is ?(No private health care insurers) Correct me if I'm wrong there. Someone who doesn't believe in euthanasia shouldn't have to pay for it through their taxes.
We have red cross if that's what your asking?
But btw It's illegal in America to. It's an moral/ethical issue that society hasn't agreed upon yet. That's the reason I see it as being how it is.
There are about a hundred more private health care ensures than red cross.
I didn't say their wasn't? But I'm fairly certain Red Cross is the most popular.
-
Reply #21
by Snak on 02 Feb, 2013 08:21
-
Who the fuck are any of any people to say that a human being is not capable of making a decision about his or her own body?
If you think a government filled with people who don't have insight in the situation has more wits about them than the person in question then you sir might possibly need to revise your beliefs. I can understand that it is easy to say that a man/woman should climb above the alements or troubles he/she may go trough, but sometimes something gets to a point where there is no longer any energy left in person to fight, at this point I believe a person should be allowed to choose and get help if he is unable to do so himself. Living in a state of no longer actually being a living person rather a drone walking around is degrading and should not be suffered by anyone. If the government seems it fit that a person should be shamed for having fought for very long then somewhere along this line we have taken a completely wrong turn.
I have overcome many thing in my life that I would not even wish on my worst enemy I know how much it saps your energy and will of life, you can either reach the point I did. Where I realised I fucking love my life due to the fact that I can see how much I have managed to do with a shit poor excuse for a chance. Or there is a second thing you can end up at you have fought and fought and it seems like you are getting nowhere and have no energy left to fight.
Tl;dr, I think any man/woman who seeks euthanasia has probably thought long and hard about what that is. So denying him/her the right to go out in a state where he/she can actually decide something like this is just a crime.
I do however not believe in suicide when it comes to people who may not be fully mentally healthy, and who do not have a reason to wish for something like euthanasia.
Perfect example for my stance is, there was 2 brothers who were going blind and I believe were allready deaf. They did no longer wish to live with both of those impairments needing basically help for everything and could no longer continue their daily life. In such a case euthanasia should obviously be allowed.
so because they have a few major disabilties obviously they should b allowed to do themselves in.
What r yer requirements for death?
-
Reply #22
by Splenda on 02 Feb, 2013 15:31
-
This is almost as debatable as the death penalty. In my opinion it should all come down to what the patient wants, given that they are mentally capable of making the decision for themself. If one is going through such physical pain and there is absolutely no way to stop it, im not sure if I'd want to live either. However, if said patient would be considered mentally unstable they should not be able to "pull the plug".
-
Reply #23
by crypto on 03 Feb, 2013 17:08
-
yeah, if it's cheaper than life-preserving treatments then go for it. people spend enormous amounts of money extending the lives of dying relatives, including the very demented and comatose, that could instead be used to save the lives of many people whose cognitive faculties aren't so addled that they might as well be dead.
-
Reply #24
by ZeMelon on 26 Aug, 2013 17:32
-
I think that if someone wants to be put out of misery, it is is right to end his life. Hospitals only make sure that you do it the painless way. it should be allow everywher parrote.
-
Reply #25
by SkiesAhoy on 26 Aug, 2013 17:38
-
I'm tired of this. Going to start giving out warnings for necros.
Do not necromance threads. Read the forum rules. It takes 5 minutes.
-Locked.