The Conservative Cave
Current Events => General Discussion => Topic started by: gcruse on May 23, 2009, 11:21:16 AM
-
Wash. state woman 1st death under new suicide law
By: RACHEL LA CORTE
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/nation/45914367.html
05/23/09 10:22 AM EDT
OLYMPIA, Wash. – Linda Fleming was diagnosed with terminal cancer and feared her last days would be filled with pain and ever-stronger doses of medication that would erode her mind.
The 66-year-old woman with late-stage pancreatic cancer wanted to be clear-headed at death, so she became the first person to kill herself under Washington state's new assisted suicide law, known as "death with dignity."
...
With family members, her physician and her dog at her side, Fleming took a deadly dose of prescription barbiturates and died Thursday night at her home in Sequim, Wash.
[...]
Relative: Doesn't she look peaceful now?
Dog: And clear-headed, too.
-
That slope is very slippery. It's a brave new world.
-
I personally don't see a problem with this. If they made the decision of their own free will, then really what is the problem? When faced with the choice of dying a slow painful death, or a peaceful painless death, the choice really shouldn't be that hard to make.
-
I personally don't see a problem with this. If they made the decision of their own free will, then really what is the problem? When faced with the choice of dying a slow painful death, or a peaceful painless death, the choice really shouldn't be that hard to make.
The problem is that we don't get to decide when and how we die. Only God can do that. Suicide is murder.
-
The problem is that we don't get to decide when and how we die. Only God can do that. Suicide is murder.
Well, not everyone follows that tenant of thinking. No one is forcing you to do this, you can just as easily say no. Other people may like the choice though.
-
Well, not everyone follows that tenant of thinking. No one is forcing you to do this, you can just as easily say no. Other people may like the choice though.
It seems to come down to whether or not one owns oneself.
Divergent political philosophies flow from the different answers.
-
I personally don't see a problem with this. If they made the decision of their own free will, then really what is the problem? When faced with the choice of dying a slow painful death, or a peaceful painless death, the choice really shouldn't be that hard to make.
It's just the first step. The next will be the state decides when you should go.
-
It's just the first step. The next will be the state decides when you should go.
Cynical much?
-
Cynical much?
I wouldn't call it being cynical, given what we know Of 0Bama's health care plans. He wanted Tom Daschle to be there and working on his health care plan, Daschle has said in one of his books about basing health care on societal benefits of that care. (something like that) Basically the old and infirm would be less likely to get high dollar life saving treatment.
I can see where a person in tremendous pain being denied care and deciding to take the easy way out. In effect, that would be the government deciding who is euthanized.