sharetrader
Page 12 of 129 FirstFirst ... 289101112131415162262112 ... LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 1281
  1. #111
    IMO
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Floating Anchor Shoals
    Posts
    9,696

    Default

    Im speaking for a majority. Long time coming and about time. Nobody but nobody has the right to force someone to suffer. We all want a good death.Also was disgusted at some people pretending they had valid reasons against when they were actually only religious ones, no compassion there.
    Last edited by Joshuatree; 14-11-2019 at 08:50 PM.

  2. #112
    Guru
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Wellington, New Zealand
    Posts
    4,876

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joshuatree View Post
    Im speaking for a majority. Long time coming and about time. Nobody but nobody has the right to force someone to suffer. We all want a good death.Also was disgusted at some people pretending they had valid reasons against when they were actually only religious ones, no compassion there.
    I would argue religious conviction is a totally valid reason. Or are people of a religious persuasion not allowed to have a view that aligns with their beliefs?

  3. #113
    IMO
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Floating Anchor Shoals
    Posts
    9,696

    Default

    No not when some one is terminal and their pain cant be managed for example, no place at all.

  4. #114
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    8,516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joshuatree View Post
    No not when some one is terminal and their pain cant be managed for example, no place at all.
    It's very rare that pain can't be managed in this day and age and I've seen a lot of people with terminal illness die over the last 30 yrs.

  5. #115
    Guru
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Wellington, New Zealand
    Posts
    4,876

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joshuatree View Post
    No not when some one is terminal and their pain cant be managed for example, no place at all.
    Totally disagree. The amount of "suffering" or "discomfort" does not even come into it.

  6. #116
    Antiquated & irrational t.rexjr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Location
    Under the sycamore tree
    Posts
    592

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blackcap View Post
    I would argue religious conviction is a totally valid reason. Or are people of a religious persuasion not allowed to have a view that aligns with their beliefs?
    The Bill has nothing to do with religion. Not one iota. People of a religious persuasion are still allowed to have a view that aligns with their beliefs

    That statement may now be written:

    People have the ability to maintain a view, & now also make a choice, that aligns with their beliefs, their situation and themselves...
    Last edited by t.rexjr; 15-11-2019 at 12:43 AM.

  7. #117
    Antiquated & irrational t.rexjr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Location
    Under the sycamore tree
    Posts
    592

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jonu View Post
    Doctors aren't keen to perform it. It goes against their ethics. The palliative care speciallists don't want it either. So the professionals who deal with these issues everyday have been ignored by an MP (and all those who voted for it) who is only in parliament by an accident of MMP.
    Much like abortion. The vast majority of the country's abortions are done by a handful of people, bloodsoaked to the elbows. Overseas abortionists have high turnover and suicide rates. Conscience finally gets to them in the end. I wonder whether Seymour has one?
    Given that a Doctor or Medical Professional risked being stuck off if they voiced their belief, it's misguided to cast that statement upon those that you seemingly speak on behalf of...

  8. #118
    Guru
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Wellington, New Zealand
    Posts
    4,876

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by t.rexjr View Post
    The Bill has nothing to do with religion. Not one iota. People of a religious persuasion are still allowed to have a view that aligns with their beliefs

    That statement may now be written:

    People have the ability to maintain a view, & now also make a choice, that aligns with their beliefs, their situation and themselves...
    That is the point I am trying to make. If people of religious persuasion and view think that euthanasia is a good thing they can vote accordingly. If they think it is a bad thing they can vote accordingly. (of course there are many other variables at play when people make decisions but that is up to them)

  9. #119
    Guru
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,977

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joshuatree View Post
    Im speaking for a majority. Long time coming and about time. Nobody but nobody has the right to force someone to suffer. We all want a good death.Also was disgusted at some people pretending they had valid reasons against when they were actually only religious ones, no compassion there.
    And there is the voice of bigotry.

    "Pretending"? Protecting the vulnerable is the height of compassion. Ignoring a persons secular arguments because they also happen to be religious? Bigotry, pure and simple.

  10. #120
    Antiquated & irrational t.rexjr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Location
    Under the sycamore tree
    Posts
    592

    Default

    To vote, protest or rally against something, demanding your belief (secular or not) upon others when the outcome does not effect you is the epitome of bigotry.
    Last edited by t.rexjr; 15-11-2019 at 09:26 AM.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •