StarGateWars Forums

Field Marshall wrote:

Loki™ wrote:

Field Marshall wrote:

Malx wrote:I work in a hospice that cares for the terminally ill, specifically focusing on cancer pacients.

Then you are more qualified to send such a sweeping statement!

To be honest, I'm not sure where I stand here, I've never had a child and I imagine I won't for a couple of years to come. However, I hope that I would be more than able to look after a child who is in need of care and attention that was of my own blood, however, sometimes I struggle to look after my own basic needs

To me, I believe that if somebody wished to make a passing easier, than it should be permitted, that a judical system controls our fate based on religious nonsense is ridiculous. I do not believe people that have locked-in syndrome are continuously forced to suffer in silence is a failing on human morales.

I believe that no child should have to suffer a life with no future and full of pain. I am happy to openly say that IF a child is to suffer, in pain and without any enjoyment, then somebody in an appropriate field able to distinguish this with no second thoughts, then I agree with this decision.

And who are you to make such a decision for someone else? If your life sucks by all means end it but you have no right to make that decision for someone else.

Hypothesis for a second, you have a child, who is in insufferable pain and will be forever. Lets say they are also deaf and blind, for arguements sake. You know for a fact that this pain will never subside and they will be unable of communication because of their inability to concentrate past their insufferable pain. This child will never have a life without enjoyment.

Lets also consider the arguement, without todays advances in medicine, childbirth and technology, this child would have died shortly after birth.

Who has the right to keep this child alive?

Loki™ wrote:

Field Marshall wrote:

Loki™ wrote:

Field Marshall wrote:

Malx wrote:I work in a hospice that cares for the terminally ill, specifically focusing on cancer pacients.

Then you are more qualified to send such a sweeping statement!

To be honest, I'm not sure where I stand here, I've never had a child and I imagine I won't for a couple of years to come. However, I hope that I would be more than able to look after a child who is in need of care and attention that was of my own blood, however, sometimes I struggle to look after my own basic needs

To me, I believe that if somebody wished to make a passing easier, than it should be permitted, that a judical system controls our fate based on religious nonsense is ridiculous. I do not believe people that have locked-in syndrome are continuously forced to suffer in silence is a failing on human morales.

I believe that no child should have to suffer a life with no future and full of pain. I am happy to openly say that IF a child is to suffer, in pain and without any enjoyment, then somebody in an appropriate field able to distinguish this with no second thoughts, then I agree with this decision.

And who are you to make such a decision for someone else? If your life sucks by all means end it but you have no right to make that decision for someone else.

Hypothesis for a second, you have a child, who is in insufferable pain and will be forever. Lets say they are also deaf and blind, for arguements sake. You know for a fact that this pain will never subside and they will be unable of communication because of their inability to concentrate past their insufferable pain. This child will never have a life without enjoyment.

Lets also consider the arguement, without todays advances in medicine, childbirth and technology, this child would have died shortly after birth.

Who has the right to keep this child alive?

How do you know the child wants to die?

Field Marshall wrote:

Loki™ wrote:

Field Marshall wrote:

Loki™ wrote:

Field Marshall wrote:

Malx wrote:I work in a hospice that cares for the terminally ill, specifically focusing on cancer pacients.

Then you are more qualified to send such a sweeping statement!

To be honest, I'm not sure where I stand here, I've never had a child and I imagine I won't for a couple of years to come. However, I hope that I would be more than able to look after a child who is in need of care and attention that was of my own blood, however, sometimes I struggle to look after my own basic needs

To me, I believe that if somebody wished to make a passing easier, than it should be permitted, that a judical system controls our fate based on religious nonsense is ridiculous. I do not believe people that have locked-in syndrome are continuously forced to suffer in silence is a failing on human morales.

I believe that no child should have to suffer a life with no future and full of pain. I am happy to openly say that IF a child is to suffer, in pain and without any enjoyment, then somebody in an appropriate field able to distinguish this with no second thoughts, then I agree with this decision.

And who are you to make such a decision for someone else? If your life sucks by all means end it but you have no right to make that decision for someone else.

Hypothesis for a second, you have a child, who is in insufferable pain and will be forever. Lets say they are also deaf and blind, for arguements sake. You know for a fact that this pain will never subside and they will be unable of communication because of their inability to concentrate past their insufferable pain. This child will never have a life without enjoyment.

Lets also consider the arguement, without todays advances in medicine, childbirth and technology, this child would have died shortly after birth.

Who has the right to keep this child alive?

How do you know the child wants to die?

What's a life without living?

[KMA]Avenger wrote:

Field Marshall wrote:

Loki™ wrote:

Field Marshall wrote:

Loki™ wrote:

Field Marshall wrote:

Malx wrote:I work in a hospice that cares for the terminally ill, specifically focusing on cancer pacients.

Then you are more qualified to send such a sweeping statement!

To be honest, I'm not sure where I stand here, I've never had a child and I imagine I won't for a couple of years to come. However, I hope that I would be more than able to look after a child who is in need of care and attention that was of my own blood, however, sometimes I struggle to look after my own basic needs

To me, I believe that if somebody wished to make a passing easier, than it should be permitted, that a judical system controls our fate based on religious nonsense is ridiculous. I do not believe people that have locked-in syndrome are continuously forced to suffer in silence is a failing on human morales.

I believe that no child should have to suffer a life with no future and full of pain. I am happy to openly say that IF a child is to suffer, in pain and without any enjoyment, then somebody in an appropriate field able to distinguish this with no second thoughts, then I agree with this decision.

And who are you to make such a decision for someone else? If your life sucks by all means end it but you have no right to make that decision for someone else.

Hypothesis for a second, you have a child, who is in insufferable pain and will be forever. Lets say they are also deaf and blind, for arguements sake. You know for a fact that this pain will never subside and they will be unable of communication because of their inability to concentrate past their insufferable pain. This child will never have a life without enjoyment.

Lets also consider the arguement, without todays advances in medicine, childbirth and technology, this child would have died shortly after birth.

Who has the right to keep this child alive?

How do you know the child wants to die?

What's a life without living?

Law of the jungle? Nobody has the right to make such far reaching morally destructive decisions.....not even if it's an adult that's suffering.

If someone wants to kill themselves then lets call it what it is and stop sugar coating it so we can feel civilised and humane....suicide.


Funny, i thought a civilised people helped the weak.

Field Marshall wrote:
Nobody has the right? Why?

Who are you to say what is morally correct or incorrect? Your opinions may, sure. Call it what you want. Just because you think that it is morally destructive, I may think it's morally destructive to allow suffering when it is not necessary.

For the record, I completely and wholly agree with euthanasia or assisted suicide for consenting adults given terminally ill or permenantly suffering patients.

[KMA]Avenger wrote:

Field Marshall wrote:
Nobody has the right? Why?

Who are you to say what is morally correct or incorrect? Your opinions may, sure. Call it what you want. Just because you think that it is morally destructive, I may think it's morally destructive to allow suffering when it is not necessary.

For the record, I completely and wholly agree with euthanasia or assisted suicide for consenting adults given terminally ill or permenantly suffering patients.

In a nutshell, murder is wrong and against the law. assisted suicide is murder....same as abortion is murder.


You people think this or that hypothetical situation (which i am sure in the real world exists for many many people) justifies your position, how anybody can justify murder regardless of the situation is beyond all comprehension.

Lets be clear, assisted suicide is murder, and those wanting to end their lives are are committing suicide...

Here's a hypothetical for you....someone is on death row but has to wait 20 years, or someone has just got a life sentence without a chance of parole, but they are innocent (and don't tell me that has not happened or a real situation). while in prison they are being bullied and picked on and their lives are a complete and utter living hell full of abuse and torment and they want to end their lives....should we give them the rope and chair to hang themselves in their cell?

[KMA]Avenger wrote:

Field Marshall wrote:

Loki™ wrote:

Field Marshall wrote:

Loki™ wrote:

Field Marshall wrote:

Malx wrote:I work in a hospice that cares for the terminally ill, specifically focusing on cancer pacients.

Then you are more qualified to send such a sweeping statement!

To be honest, I'm not sure where I stand here, I've never had a child and I imagine I won't for a couple of years to come. However, I hope that I would be more than able to look after a child who is in need of care and attention that was of my own blood, however, sometimes I struggle to look after my own basic needs

To me, I believe that if somebody wished to make a passing easier, than it should be permitted, that a judical system controls our fate based on religious nonsense is ridiculous. I do not believe people that have locked-in syndrome are continuously forced to suffer in silence is a failing on human morales.

I believe that no child should have to suffer a life with no future and full of pain. I am happy to openly say that IF a child is to suffer, in pain and without any enjoyment, then somebody in an appropriate field able to distinguish this with no second thoughts, then I agree with this decision.

And who are you to make such a decision for someone else? If your life sucks by all means end it but you have no right to make that decision for someone else.

Hypothesis for a second, you have a child, who is in insufferable pain and will be forever. Lets say they are also deaf and blind, for arguements sake. You know for a fact that this pain will never subside and they will be unable of communication because of their inability to concentrate past their insufferable pain. This child will never have a life without enjoyment.

Lets also consider the arguement, without todays advances in medicine, childbirth and technology, this child would have died shortly after birth.

Who has the right to keep this child alive?

How do you know the child wants to die?

What's a life without living?

Law of the jungle? Nobody has the right to make such far reaching morally destructive decisions.....not even if it's an adult that's suffering.

If someone wants to kill themselves then lets call it what it is and stop sugar coating it so we can feel civilised and humane....suicide.


Funny, i thought a civilised people helped the weak.

atok wrote:lol we as a people are far from civilized, i grew up believing in people but now pfft no chance, as for this topic how can child be given the right to end their life? so they come home from school been bullied for a week and decide to end their life thats whats next, or all the other points of parents being given the power to, to me thats way to much power hence murder you chose to kill that person its murder in my eyes

Juliette wrote:

atok wrote:lol we as a people are far from civilized, i grew up believing in people but now pfft no chance, as for this topic how can child be given the right to end their life? so they come home from school been bullied for a week and decide to end their life thats whats next, or all the other points of parents being given the power to, to me thats way to much power hence murder you chose to kill that person its murder in my eyes

Suicide is not illegal, at any age. If a kid wants to die, they can make sure they do. The issue in this case however is whether or not you should help them do it if they ask you to; the 'assisted suicide' concept.

Euthanasia, before being done, requires extensive checks and talks with psychologists. I do not believe a minor should be given that choice, for reasons Ashu outlined earlier, and because a child can actually outgrow most issues adults would be torn apart by.
Self-determination presents some diabolical dilemmas (with no right answer, only varying degrees of wrong-unsatisfactory), this being one of them.

Rodwolf wrote:Whas quiet surprised to see my country in a title of a topic on this forum...

Seems there is more fuzz about it abroad then here. Most people here are certain it will most likely never be used or very rare at best.

PS : the kids have to decide for themselves with a battery of people + parents confirming it(hence why it probably will never happen).

Sol wrote:

Rodwolf wrote:Whas quiet surprised to see my country in a title of a topic on this forum...

Seems there is more fuzz about it abroad then here. Most people here are certain it will most likely never be used or very rare at best.

PS : the kids have to decide for themselves with a battery of people + parents confirming it(hence why it probably will never happen).

I think most here understand there are many checks and balances associated with it, but the actual idea was still implemented.

If these people really want to be euthanised they can do it themselves xD, although very blunt, it's how I see things. Why pass the responsibility, blame and pressure onto many others. If you really wanted to die, if you were in constant pain, then you would do it yourself.
That being said, if you want to help someone die because of physical pain (when I'm sure there are plenty of drugs to relieve most of it), why not help people in emotional pain (which can turn into physical pain quite literally).

Loki™ wrote: Yep. Allowing things like this is a gateway to worse things.