Oh yeah, did I mention he's a nurse?
And lets not forget the women in Oregon who was refused cancer treatment by the state run medical plan and offered doctor assisted suicide instead.
AP Minnesota man suspected of encouraging suicides
MINNEAPOLIS – A nurse who authorities say got his kicks by visiting Internet suicide chat rooms and encouraging depressed people to kill themselves is under investigation in at least two deaths and could face criminal charges that could test the limits of the First Amendment. read the rest
18 comments:
The law may not be able to get this guy,but he will be judged. The thought of this guy working in a nursing home just makes me ill. What a horrible man.
From a purely moral perspective, you're right. There is no difference -- assisted sucide is a moral wrong, it shouldn't be legal, and it is a sad commentary on our society that such a practice has a much traction as it does.
That said, legally, there is a world of difference between a system where there are least some limitations on the practice, some procedural safeguards, and some transparency, and a world where somebody is simply acting as a rogue.
Those comments shouldn't be construed as support for assisted suicide on my part. I don't support it -- I completely disagree with the idea that such a practice should be legal.
As for the Oregon woman who was denied cancer coverage, that was an outrage, and an example of the kind of brutality that will be a mighty temptation for our bureacrats if assisted suicide is legalized once socialized medicine is put into place. Cost cutting just got a whole lot easier?
Mary Ellen - I fear for the souls of the people who have turned their back on God.
The thing is Mark he didn't participate in the suicides, he merely "yelled jump", as the article stated.
All this points up to me is the inconsistency in people's "thinking." We have, as a result of poor education and the undermining of natural law, lost our ability to reason.
The same people that see this man's actions as depraved, consider doctor assisted suicide as merciful.
We now live in a world of no absolutes. Truth is a concept that shifts in the sand depending on which direction and how hard the wind is blowing.
I'm not a proponent of suicide but I will say that many noble men and philosophers have thought that suicide was permissible, even noble, in some circumstances. I think primarily of the stoics, especially Seneca. I do not think that there is anything in nature that proves that suicide is wrong. If we regard suicide as being wrong in all cases, it is only because we have the benefit of Christian revelation.
What absolutes? No ancient civilization ever held it to be an absolute that suicide was wrong. I believe in the natural law; but the natural law says nothing about the issue of suicide. In fact, one could even argue that the natural law condones suicide in some situations. The opposition to suicide is purely a Jewish-Christian prejudice. It is not rooted nature nor in the noblest of the ancient philosophies.
Just fuse my two posts together (I thought the first one didn't post LOL)
Adrienne,
D'oh! I should have read the article more carefully. Thanks for pointing out my error.
Joe,
The Christian position against suicide is based not only on revelation but also on reason -- the natural law. The human instinct for self-preservation is an example of natural law encouraging the preservation of life, even in dire circumstances. While people no doubt sometimes seek to end their lives in order to relieve pain, etc., such actions (while perfectly understandable) result from a turning away from the natural law, rather than an embrace of it.
Joe - the other point is that we cannot presume that all civilizations are equal. And truth is an absolute. Something is either true or it's not.
And I'm too tired now to elaborate on that. I'll maybe do a whole post on the subject.
Thanks for your input and making the old noggin (mine) work overtime...
Mark - I knew exactly what you meant. I'm good that way...
Prove to me that it is an absolute duty for any being to preserve it's life at all costs and prove this from reason alone; not from religious tradition.
Adrienne, I don't presume all civilizations are equal and you are right to make that point. With regard to matters of morality though, we are not dealing with the categories of true and false but the categories of right and wrong.
Now, one can claim that according to natural law, it is an absolute duty never to take one's life. But such a claim requires an argument. As far as I can tell the only natural law that is universal is the instinct toward happiness and aversion toward suffering. So all human actions are governed by the pursuit of happiness and the avoidance of harm and suffering. Yet we can't a priori rule out the possibility that on occasion, a rational being may decide that it is better for him to avoid severe harm and suffering than to continue his existence in the vain hope that he might end up happier. Not all life is worth living. A life where one has no hope of any pleasure or happiness may not be a life that is worth living.
I understand the Christian objections to this. But my point is that it is much more difficult to refute what I have just stated if you bracket all claims made by religious traditions.
I've been following this story, it makes me so angry, this man is sick, sick, sick!!!
A BLESSED SUNDAY MORNING FROM CAPE BRETON ISLAND.
Just for the record, I'm not defending this guy.
Since when is it a crime to tell someone to drop dead? (Can't help myself sometimes!)
I don't think that what the guy did is a crime; though perhaps he could be civilly responsible? I'm not a lawyer though.
Joe - I doubt they can get him for anything. Similiar cases have been thrown out but, like you, I'm not a lawyer and who knows what some court could decide.
Post a Comment