Brittany Maynard ended her own life before her tumor could rob her of it

[WinterBorn]

Ok..thanks..that's a good, honest, general answer.
I was curious if a person, knowing they would suffer a long and progressively worse and more painful disease and they may even reduce to a vegetative state where they were no longer in control of their body/mind and knew they would linger for days/weeks/months in that condition...

The only way for a person in that condition to get to heaven is to allow all that to happen to them?

...and for argument's sake let's assume no miracle cure for her specific cancer is forthcoming..and no sudden "miracle" occurs where the tumor inexplicably starts shrinking and she returns to full health...

I believe there is a way out of that situation without a problem....and that would be to float yourself out on an iceberg like the Eskimos do or simply walk into the woods or mountains and let nature (God) decide your end. I always figured if I had a terminal disease that would lead to a disgusting end, I'd steal a Ducati super bike and head out on the Phoenix freeways WFO (wide fucking open) knowing a car or a guardrail might bring about my end but not deciding which one for myself. And if I got into the mountains without being killed, I'd return the bike to it's rightful owner and make a better plan.

So certain kinds of suicide are ok? And your "Ducati Solution" puts how many other lives at risk? Whereas, this woman harmed no one, put no one at risk, and accomplished the same thing.

And if God wanted her to survive, why couldn't he make the drugs she took ineffective?

Talk about situational morality. lol

 

[Nosmo King]

Ok..thanks..that's a good, honest, general answer.
I was curious if a person, knowing they would suffer a long and progressively worse and more painful disease and they may even reduce to a vegetative state where they were no longer in control of their body/mind and knew they would linger for days/weeks/months in that condition...

The only way for a person in that condition to get to heaven is to allow all that to happen to them?

...and for argument's sake let's assume no miracle cure for her specific cancer is forthcoming..and no sudden "miracle" occurs where the tumor inexplicably starts shrinking and she returns to full health...

I believe there is a way out of that situation without a problem....and that would be to float yourself out on an iceberg like the Eskimos do or simply walk into the woods or mountains and let nature (God) decide your end. I always figured if I had a terminal disease that would lead to a disgusting end, I'd steal a Ducati super bike and head out on the Phoenix freeways WFO (wide fucking open) knowing a car or a guardrail might bring about my end but not deciding which one for myself. And if I got into the mountains without being killed, I'd return the bike to it's rightful owner and make a better plan.

There are plenty of people who are, thankfully, more responsible than you seem to be. Rather than riding a stolen motorcycle into an oncoming automobile carrying who knows how many innocent people, some responsible people would take the option of a quiet, peaceful dignified death surrounded by loved ones.

The Eskimo iceflow or moronic Easy Rider scenarios simply show that you are in favor of suicide in the most dire circumstances. But you are just irresponsible about it.

 

[BullKurtz]

.


You cling to your beliefs. I have no problem with that. But when you demand that your beliefs govern those of us who do not share them, I will oppose you and win.

Why not go FULL OBAMA and say I'm also "clinging" to my guns too? Listen, I don't care what you have a problem with. I've never said in this thread I want a law to prevent suicide or legal remedy for those who try it. You keep clinging to that because you're at a dead end (pun) trying to defend your hippie bullshit. What you "win" is a matter of atheist judges who hate themselves more than Christians because down inside they know they're pathetic. So like all stalinists, they pass laws to allow things long forbidden in the Scriptures....to get us all down in the sewer they live in. You ain't anything special....just another sucker who bought that garbage at a price you'll one day have to pay.

 

[Nosmo King]

.


You cling to your beliefs. I have no problem with that. But when you demand that your beliefs govern those of us who do not share them, I will oppose you and win.

Why not go FULL OBAMA and say I'm also "clinging" to my guns too? Listen, I don't care what you have a problem with. I've never said in this thread I want a law to prevent suicide or legal remedy for those who try it. You keep clinging to that because you're at a dead end (pun) trying to defend your hippie bullshit. What you "win" is a matter of atheist judges who hate themselves more than Christians because down inside they know they're pathetic. So like all stalinists, they pass laws to allow things long forbidden in the Scriptures....to get us all down in the sewer they live in. You ain't anything special....just another sucker who bought that garbage at a price you'll one day have to pay.

If we legislated by scripture, how would that square with the first amendment? Wouldn't legislating by scripture establish and promote a religion?

You're playing fast and loose with the first amendment. Are you this flexible with the second?

 

[BullKurtz]

The Eskimo iceflow or moronic Easy Rider scenarios simply show that you are in favor of suicide in the most dire circumstances. But you are just irresponsible about it.

I willingly climbed into 44 helicopters before,during, and after the Tet Offensive knowing at any moment I could get greased and yet I never hesitated. So give me some credit for knowing something about living and the expectation that my life could come to a sudden and likely painful end. 44 times I jumped out of those birds with the same expectation and by the Grace of God dealt death without suffering it. Maybe you know as much or more about it than me....but if you do, I'd think you'd be more willing to understand the ramifications of being in harm's way, that I have always been aware of.

 

[Katzndogz]

.


You cling to your beliefs. I have no problem with that. But when you demand that your beliefs govern those of us who do not share them, I will oppose you and win.

Why not go FULL OBAMA and say I'm also "clinging" to my guns too? Listen, I don't care what you have a problem with. I've never said in this thread I want a law to prevent suicide or legal remedy for those who try it. You keep clinging to that because you're at a dead end (pun) trying to defend your hippie bullshit. What you "win" is a matter of atheist judges who hate themselves more than Christians because down inside they know they're pathetic. So like all stalinists, they pass laws to allow things long forbidden in the Scriptures....to get us all down in the sewer they live in. You ain't anything special....just another sucker who bought that garbage at a price you'll one day have to pay.

If we legislated by scripture, how would that square with the first amendment? Wouldn't legislating by scripture establish and promote a religion?

You're playing fast and loose with the first amendment. Are you this flexible with the second?

We already legislate by scripture. Otherwise murder, theft and fraud would be Chistian and unenforceable impositions of religion.

 

[WinterBorn]

.


You cling to your beliefs. I have no problem with that. But when you demand that your beliefs govern those of us who do not share them, I will oppose you and win.

Why not go FULL OBAMA and say I'm also "clinging" to my guns too? Listen, I don't care what you have a problem with. I've never said in this thread I want a law to prevent suicide or legal remedy for those who try it. You keep clinging to that because you're at a dead end (pun) trying to defend your hippie bullshit. What you "win" is a matter of atheist judges who hate themselves more than Christians because down inside they know they're pathetic. So like all stalinists, they pass laws to allow things long forbidden in the Scriptures....to get us all down in the sewer they live in. You ain't anything special....just another sucker who bought that garbage at a price you'll one day have to pay.

If we legislated by scripture, how would that square with the first amendment? Wouldn't legislating by scripture establish and promote a religion?

You're playing fast and loose with the first amendment. Are you this flexible with the second?

We already legislate by scripture. Otherwise murder, theft and fraud would be Chistian and unenforceable impositions of religion.

Murder, theft and fraud have been against the law in every set of laws written, including those that predate the 10 commandments.

 

[martybegan]

We let it get to that point sooner or later the insurance company is going to want in on the decision making.

Then the law will have to be changed.

The law clearly says that a doctor must have diagnosed a person with a terminal disease and the doctor must have documented and proven that the patient has 6 months or less of life.

An insurance company can't get involved beyond paying for the drugs. The law won't allow it.

The drugs in question are cheap, that is not the concern, the concern is that insurance companies would see the potential cost savings in convincing people to end their lives vs. continuing treatment.

Unlike some people I don't see insurance companies as evil, but one does have to consider that this may factor into their cost considerations.

 

[WinterBorn]

.


You cling to your beliefs. I have no problem with that. But when you demand that your beliefs govern those of us who do not share them, I will oppose you and win.

Why not go FULL OBAMA and say I'm also "clinging" to my guns too? Listen, I don't care what you have a problem with. I've never said in this thread I want a law to prevent suicide or legal remedy for those who try it. You keep clinging to that because you're at a dead end (pun) trying to defend your hippie bullshit. What you "win" is a matter of atheist judges who hate themselves more than Christians because down inside they know they're pathetic. So like all stalinists, they pass laws to allow things long forbidden in the Scriptures....to get us all down in the sewer they live in. You ain't anything special....just another sucker who bought that garbage at a price you'll one day have to pay.

Sorry that I don't fit your notions of who I am. I am all for the 2nd amendment, and have been quite vocal about it.

I am not the one who started condemning this woman based on religious beliefs that she may or may not have held.

But if pressing stereotypes makes you feel better, then keep at it.

 

[Mr Natural]

Are we Americans living in a secular society, or are you espousing Christian Sharia?

There's nothing "sharia" about Christian law, asshole....no Christian wants to behead you for drinking a beer or laughing at God. Take a look where our "secular society" has gotten us. You can scream at me but I didn't make the rules or always follow them until I got the Word. If you knew anything about my life you'd know only God could have saved me from death so many times. Comes a point in every person's life they take stock of their close calls....some call it luck but I know better.

And if you want to follow your faith, that is all well and good.

But you do not have the right to make laws governing others based solely on your religious beliefs.

Really? Maybe you should check out who the Founders were and what they said about law and justice. I'm not suggesting that suicidal people should be fined or jailed. All I'm saying is that your kind is willing to accept their horrible decision as somehow okay....okay for who? you? You ain't a Christian so shut the fuck up about our rules.

You, based on your language and spirit, clearly do not know the Lord and Savior.

Counsel yourself before you counsel others, friend.

We ain't friends asshole.

How very "Christian" of you.

 

[saveliberty]

So you decide to commit suicide as a realistic alternative to living, a personal choice you say. Okay, then why make a media event out of it? Unless it was just another in a series of selfish choices.

 

[Nosmo King]

The Eskimo iceflow or moronic Easy Rider scenarios simply show that you are in favor of suicide in the most dire circumstances. But you are just irresponsible about it.

I willingly climbed into 44 helicopters before,during, and after the Tet Offensive knowing at any moment I could get greased and yet I never hesitated. So give me some credit for knowing something about living and the expectation that my life could come to a sudden and likely painful end. 44 times I jumped out of those birds with the same expectation and by the Grace of God dealt death without suffering it. Maybe you know as much or more about it than me....but if you do, I'd think you'd be more willing to understand the ramifications of being in harm's way, that I have always been aware of.

I salute your service. But smashing a stolen motorcycle headlong into a car driven by an innocent civilian has nothing to do with the Tet Offensive. It does have to do with a reckless, irresponsible attitude.

 

[saveliberty]

So you decide to commit suicide as a realistic alternative to living, a personal choice you say. Okay, then why make a media event out of it? Unless it was just another in a series of selfish choices.

 

[Nosmo King]

.


You cling to your beliefs. I have no problem with that. But when you demand that your beliefs govern those of us who do not share them, I will oppose you and win.

Why not go FULL OBAMA and say I'm also "clinging" to my guns too? Listen, I don't care what you have a problem with. I've never said in this thread I want a law to prevent suicide or legal remedy for those who try it. You keep clinging to that because you're at a dead end (pun) trying to defend your hippie bullshit. What you "win" is a matter of atheist judges who hate themselves more than Christians because down inside they know they're pathetic. So like all stalinists, they pass laws to allow things long forbidden in the Scriptures....to get us all down in the sewer they live in. You ain't anything special....just another sucker who bought that garbage at a price you'll one day have to pay.

If we legislated by scripture, how would that square with the first amendment? Wouldn't legislating by scripture establish and promote a religion?

You're playing fast and loose with the first amendment. Are you this flexible with the second?

We already legislate by scripture. Otherwise murder, theft and fraud would be Chistian and unenforceable impositions of religion.

Murder, theft and fraud are not exclusive to the Judeo-Christian ethic as criminal offenses. These offenses are universally scorned and punishable, unless you live in a society of pirates.

The crimes of murder, theft and fraud were not legislated from the Bible.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Give Bull some lee way.

He survived Vietnam, so good for him.

He has a right to express his opinion, even if it is a form of fascism and Christianity.

 

[WinterBorn]

So you decide to commit suicide as a realistic alternative to living, a personal choice you say. Okay, then why make a media event out of it? Unless it was just another in a series of selfish choices.

Or it was an attempt to help others who may not have the financial means to relocate to Oregon. It raises awareness of the need for laws allowing this sort of mercy.

 

[Dana7360]

We let it get to that point sooner or later the insurance company is going to want in on the decision making.

Then the law will have to be changed.

The law clearly says that a doctor must have diagnosed a person with a terminal disease and the doctor must have documented and proven that the patient has 6 months or less of life.

An insurance company can't get involved beyond paying for the drugs. The law won't allow it.

The drugs in question are cheap, that is not the concern, the concern is that insurance companies would see the potential cost savings in convincing people to end their lives vs. continuing treatment.

Unlike some people I don't see insurance companies as evil, but one does have to consider that this may factor into their cost considerations.

Ok let me try this again.

It's written into the law that the only way an insurance company can be involved is to pay for the drugs.

Other than that, no insurance company can be involved with doctor assisted suicide.

So what you're saying might happen can't happen unless the law is changed. It's written so that no insurance company can influence a patient or be involved beyond paying for the drugs.

 

[Pogo]

Give Bull some lee way.

He survived Vietnam, so good for him.

He has a right to express his opinion, even if it is a form of fascism and Christianity.

Sorry, no "leeway" for simplistic Appeal to Emotion fallacies.

 

[R.D.]

So you decide to commit suicide as a realistic alternative to living, a personal choice you say. Okay, then why make a media event out of it? Unless it was just another in a series of selfish choices.

That's my concern, she was ready to put it off. But her advocacy and the group would be tarnished. Therefore death with dignity may not be the case at all. Personally, I don't think k there is anything dignified about the public display she created around herself.

 

[martybegan]

We let it get to that point sooner or later the insurance company is going to want in on the decision making.

Then the law will have to be changed.

The law clearly says that a doctor must have diagnosed a person with a terminal disease and the doctor must have documented and proven that the patient has 6 months or less of life.

An insurance company can't get involved beyond paying for the drugs. The law won't allow it.

The drugs in question are cheap, that is not the concern, the concern is that insurance companies would see the potential cost savings in convincing people to end their lives vs. continuing treatment.

Unlike some people I don't see insurance companies as evil, but one does have to consider that this may factor into their cost considerations.

Ok let me try this again.

It's written into the law that the only way an insurance company can be involved is to pay for the drugs.

Other than that, no insurance company can be involved with doctor assisted suicide.

So what you're saying might happen can't happen unless the law is changed. It's written so that no insurance company can influence a patient or be involved beyond paying for the drugs.

Laws that prohibit influence are notoriously hard to enforce, or have you not noticed all the lobbying that goes on, both over and under the counter?