Yesterday Italian Beppino Englaro won the right to end the life of his daughter after she has been 16 years in coma due to the consequences of a road accident.

The controversial decision to end the life of Eluana Englaro is the first such ruling by an Italian court. The judgement drew instant criticism from the Vatican, which condemned it as as 'euthanasia'. Miss Englaro, 35, has been in a vegetative state ever since she was involved in a road accident aged 19. The ruling marked the end of a lengthy legal battle led by her parents.

Eluana's father based his appeal on the fact that she had been in good health and of sound mind before the accident and would not have wanted to be kept alive in a vegetative state. He has been campaigning since 1999 through the courts to have the treatment to his daughter suspended and he had been turned down six times until yesterday's ruling in Milan.

What is so special in this case is that it is the first ever Italian court decision to allow suspending of any medical treatment and (artificial) ways of sustaining life. And also that the judgment drew instant criticism from the Vatican, which condemned it as as euthanasia.

Keeping to the legal appeal period of 60 days, medical treatment keeping Eluana alive in a Milan hospital will after that period be stopped (if no further appeal procedure is started).

The Vatican calls this 'euthanasia', while all that is allowed now is stopping all further treatment - a passive process.

I note that in the US yearly many people still get killed by State organized executions.
But I never hear of gigantic protests against that format of killing by huge groups of Christians, while these same Christians made 2 years ago a big spectacle out of the euthanasia of a US coma patient.

Why would this form of euthanasia - letting nature run it's own way - not be a morally correct decision?

Is it not much more morally reprehensible to force a human being - often against his/her will - into a permanent vegetative state to die after many years without any dignity ?

Your opinion please !

·

·

I cringed and cried when Terry Schiavo died wondering what was next and Terry was not in a coma at the time either.

Terry was not in a coma at the time either.
Where do you get that from? She had been in coma for many years...
There was hardly any brain left in her cranium... See the photo's :
Left: CT scan of normal brain; Right: Schiavo's 2002 CT scan provided by Ronald Cranford, showing loss of brain tissue. The black area is liquid, indicating hydrocephalus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrocephalus).

:rolleyes:

·

To me personally a person in a coma is someone who does not open their eyes and sit up. A person in a coma to me is someone who cannot even open their eyes. Terry to me, anyway, regardless of your photos above of her brain inactivity was not in a coma. Her demise was highly untimely.

To me personally a person in a coma is someone who does not open their eyes and sit up. A person in a coma to me is someone who cannot even open their eyes. Terry to me, anyway, regardless of your photos above of her brain inactivity was not in a coma. Her demise was highly untimely.
Well... As you state : to YOU it seems to have been that way...

:rolleyes:

·

News flash! Most Christians don't have time to go somewhere to demonstrate about something. We are mostly working people and can hardly afford to miss a day's pay. That's probably not a problem with you rich folks and those who ride the welfare wagon.

This is how "Christians" rationalize the inconsistency in their views on abortion and capital punishment. Those executed by capital punishment "deserve it". The whole basis of their Christianity is punish, punish, punish not only criminals, but they also judge everyone harshly!

It is sadly ironic that these days when we are all being choked by overpopulation and resultant pollution of the air, water etc, that letting a brain vacant individual die naturally is so wrenching to Christians to the point that huge amounts of money are spent keeping the poor souls alive.

There is a big difference between actively ending a life , for example giving supraphysiologic doses of potassium IV, and withholding treatment at the request of that person.

It is called a living will. A person may, when competent, decide beforehand that in the future event of an illness that mentaly incapacitates them and that illness may cause them to die, they may want to die "naturally" or be a "no code." That is, no mechanical ventilation or cardiac resuscitation, or no feeding tube or no dialysis.

This occurs daily in hospitals. Even in the Catholic hospital I work at.

If there is no living will, the decision to continue on is left to the assigned power of attorney, and if there is not one, next of kin.

In the Schiavo case, it was determinig who had POA, the husband who had conflicts of interest, or the parents who actually cared for her.

Where do you get that from? She had been in coma for many years ...
There was hardly any brain left in her cranium ... See the photo's :
Left: CT scan of normal brain; Right: Schiavo's 2002 CT scan provided by Ronald Cranford, showing loss of brain tissue. The black area is liquid, indicating hydrocephalus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrocephalus).

:rolleyes:

·


Actually it is atrophy - a wasting of the brain tissue.
Hydopcephalus would but pressure on normal brain tissue. There would be no sulci or dark lines in the periphery if this is the case. Hydrocephalus , in many cases, is treatable.

The whole basis of their Christianity is punish, punish, punish not only criminals, but they also judge everyone harshly!


Choux, please get the theology correct before "judging."


In Christianity God is perfect. He loves us and created us. He gives us free will. NO ONE is perfect enough to be with God, we are all sinners. We do not deserve to be in Heaven with Him when HE JUDGES us. John 3:16 tells us the rest of the story. :D

Dare I? What the heck.

A little story; Both my parents died of cancer in 2001, 6 1/2 months apart. My dad lived for 2 weeks after diagnosed, my mother for 10 months.

Three weeks before mom died she was told that she was terminal, had less than 6 months to live. She took the news very well, finally she new what her destiny was.

She settled all her affairs, made plans to travel to Germany to see her relatives (of course I went with her) and then waited to die. For a week she still did Chemo, and radiation, and then one day stopped, why go through that for a few extra weeks?

One day, a terribly painful day, she looked at me and said this "if a dog gets sick, is in terrible pain, we take pity on him, a simple needle and he goes to sleep, no suffering, no more pain. Why are we so cruel to human beings, we think it is our right to make them suffer, why?"

I believe in God, so did my Mom, and if it had been legal, if I could have ended my mothers suffering in a painless, peaceful way, I would have done it, with no regrets. In the end, in Germany, when she took her last breath, I called no one, no ambulance, no doctor, not a soul, that was my promise to her, and I kept it.

That's my opinion.

Altenweg
I hear you. In my case my sister lived through a lengthy kidney disease. She suffered many years through transplant,eventual rejection of the transplant ;dialysis for many years and the eventual breakdown of other body functions as a result of her illness. All in all it was about a 20 year struggle .

These were the days when my faith was at it's lowest. To me she was a saint and I did not understand why she should be subject to the trial of Job. But if anything her faith increased during this time of her ordeal .She showed tremendous courage .

When she began her struggle kidney disease treatment was in it's infancy. It advanced tremendously in the time of her illness. I questioned the utility of continuing . I began to realize that she determined that her struggle would in the future help another kidney patient like her because of the added knowledge the medical profession gained from treating her.
Then when I recall what Jesus did for humanity with his sacrifice I connected the dots and it all made sense.

Now I do think that it is ultimately up to the patient or their guardian to decide what is right for the patient .
In the case mentioned in this posting I do not think that the State should be the decider unless there is a clear question of who is the proper person to make the choice. That was the issue in the Schriavo case. Ultimately the courts decided that it was the husband's call.

News flash! Most Christians don't have time to go somewhere to demonstrate about something. We are mostly working people and can hardly afford to miss a day's pay. That's probably not a problem with you rich folks and those who ride the welfare wagon.



What is the "you rich folks" thing about?

The whole basis of their Christianity is punish, punish, punish ...
How true, Choux ! :)

===


Most Christians don't have time to go somewhere to demonstrate about something.
Your reply is deliberately sidestepping the real issue here, galveston1 !
And your remark on that "welfare wagon" : is that your "christian compassion" speaking there? :(

===


... if it had been legal, if I could have ended my mothers suffering in a painless, peaceful way, I would have done it, with no regrets.
Sorry to hear you went all through that. I fully agree with your conclusion. That is precisely what this topic is about! An attack at controlling religion forcing others to live along it's religious standards. It should be up to every individual to die in dignity.

:rolleyes:

·

He means that if you are rich or poor you CAN go protest because you have the time
But working people have to go to work and can not go to protests.

Edit: ***To make Credo happy


News flash! Most Christians don't have time to go somewhere to demonstrate about something. We are mostly working people and can hardly afford to miss a day's pay. That's probably not a problem with you rich folks and those who ride the welfare wagon.


What is the "you rich folks" thing about?

He means that if you are rich or poor you CAN go protest because you have the time ... but working people have to go to work and can not go to protests.
Please do not even TRY to suggest what I mean. You can not. As is clearly indicated by your reply here.
If one really wants he/she can go and do anything he/she wants.
The question is if he/she really wants, or if it is easier to be silent and not make too many waves in the christian dominated pool of control of individuals... See also my topic on religion and government.

:rolleyes:

·

I wasn't suggesting anything about what you mean
I was replying to JUDY KAY's question to Galveston
'
THANK YOU!:rolleyes:

I wasn't suggesting anything about what you mean
I was replying to JUDY KAY's question to Galveston
It is my topic question, and unless you clearly address another person you are addressing me ! You did not name anyone , so I react.

You do not even know the board rules, I see !

:D

·

Cred... clearly nohelp was writing at the same time as you were, that would have made her post right under Judys... I would think a person of your intelligence could have understood that.

Cred...clearly nohelp was writing at the same time as you were, that would have made her post right under Judys...I would think a person of your intelligence could have understood that.

EXACTLY but of course to Perkie that is totally irrelevant :D

This is my topic question, and unless you clearly address another person you are addressing me !
You ninc*mp**ps do not even know the board rules, I see !

:D

·

Better than being called a "gringo'!

I personally never saw a reason for christians to seek medical attention in the first place. According to them we live in an evil sin filled world(that is perfectly designed by god for us?) and paradise awaits us. The bible doesn't specifically say you have to get medical treatment or even develop new cures for things. If you really believe your own hype you wouldn't seek medical attention at all because it would be god's will to save you or not save you and if he didn't paradise awaits so what's the big deal.

Neither does the Bible say you should not seek medical help. After all, when peolple came to Jesus they wanted to be healthy, and Jesus had compassion and healed many, he did not just bring them up to heaven at that instant moment in time.

But we see the physical side, God sees the spiritual side, the side that matters for all eternity. Matthew 9 - Jesus healing the paralytic.

I personally never saw a reason for christians to seek medical attention in the first place. According to them we live in an evil sin filled world(that is perfectly designed by god for us?) and paradise awaits us. The bible doesn't specifically say you have to get medical treatment or even develop new cures for things. If you really believe your own hype you wouldn't seek medical attention at all because it would be god's will to save you or not save you and if he didn't paradise awaits so whats the big deal.

I wouldn't rule out God not wanting Christians to seek medical help. We are told to take care of our bodies. Which of course means taking care of it so that you hopefully do not need a doctor but if you need one then it is not wrong. I think it is totally wrong for some religions to deny parents getting their children medical help to the point they die so that right there alone I have to believe God is okay with medical attention.

A man was swimming across the Atlantic Ocean and he was about to drown. A boat came by and the man in the boat said, "You're drowning, let me save you!"
The man drowning said, "No, that's okay I will put my faith in God."
The man in the boat says, "Okay, if you say so."

A few minutes later another boat comes by and the woman in the boat says, "You're drowning, let me save you!"
The man drowning said, "No, that's okay, I will put my faith in God."

A few minutes later another boat comes by and the people in the boat say, "You're drowning, let us save you!"
The man drowning says, "No that's okay, I will put my faith in God."
The people in the boat say "Okay, if you say so."

So the man drowns. He goes up to heaven and sees God. The man says, " I put my faith in you and you didn't save me."
Then God says, " I SENT YOU THREE BOATS!"

That's my take on it. :)

In response to Altenwegs post! #26


A man was swimming across the Atlantic Ocean and he was about to drown. A boat came by and the man in the boat said, "You're drowning, let me save you!"
The man drowning said, "No, that's okay I will put my faith in God."
The man in the boat says, "Okay, if you say so."

A few minutes later another boat comes by and the woman in the boat says, "You're drowning, let me save you!"
The man drowning said, "No, that's okay, I will put my faith in God."

A few minutes later another boat comes by and the people in the boat say, "You're drowning, let us save you!"
The man drowning says, "No that's okay, I will put my faith in God."
The people in the boat say "Okay, if you say so."

So the man drowns. He goes up to heaven and sees God. The man says, " I put my faith in you and you didn't save me."
Then God says, " I SENT YOU THREE BOATS!"

That's my take on it. :)


Exactly!!
One I tell only it is a flood and the guy is stuck on the roof.

But I still say if you are so sure that paradise awaits you why not go as soon as possible. It seems like a simple logic problem to me. If you're here and you are sure over there is better why not go over there as soon as you can. Of course as an atheist every moment I'm here is precious because there isn't somewhere better to go, so my goal is to live as long as possible but for christians you should logically have the exact opposite goal. To live a short of a life as possible with very little sin and of course the shorter you live the less time you will have to be temped by sin.

Going to heaven is a reward for living. I have every intention of staying here as long as I can. I like life, it's good, love being with my family, my kids, walking on the grass, smelling the flowers. Do I believe in heaven? I sure want to. Am I wrong? Could be, I guess I won't find out until I die. Have I sinned? You betcha. So maybe I'm not going to heaven even if it exists.

My goal, live as long as I can, enjoy every minute and hope for the best.

What does this have to do with the topic Michealb?

Box guy,

Theology is the study of god fantasy and make believe. YOu don't seem to understand the basis of your religion.

The basis of Christianity is that GodAlmighty will torment you in hell for *eternity* if you, his "beloved" creation do not follow his rules. Salvation is the only way an individual can escape this horrific situation and "go to heaven".

That is what you BELIEVE whether you understand it or not.

It is not true, you just *believe it is true*. It is religion, faith.

Theology is the study of god fantasy and make believe. You don't seem to understand the basis of your religion.
Great response, Choux !

:D

·

It fits in with euthanasia, religion and morality I'm sure, but I guess it has to do with the question of why is it wrong to let nature take it's course when your sick or when someone who is unable to think for themselves is sick.

I'll accept an answer of "I'm not sure there is a heaven but I am sure I am least here." It's really a question for those people who are certain that there is a heaven and that they are sure they have a personal in with Jesus. I know there are certain sects of Christianity that don't take medical attention I just don't see a reason why all the ones that are so sure don't do the same.

Jesus main earthly ministry was *healing the sick*... If Christian people *really believed*, they would engage in faith healing... omit physicians. Of course, they don't really believe because it is dangerously passé.

I just ask myself why there is such a clear Christian opposition each time anywhere any format of euthanasia is introduced.
What is essential is that there are strict rules for the euthanasia process, and that the patient has signed an instruction towards euthanasia (and when to perform euthanasia).
What Christians think of that should be totally irrelevant. Who does not want euthanasia should simply not sign an instruction to do so.

What therefore is very important is that every person should sign a last will with instructions regarding euthanasia. I feel that the decision when and how to end your life is up to you, regardless what other people find of that.

The only part of euthanasia open to debate should be when people who have not signed an instruction suddenly fall ill or are injured , and are as a result of that too late to sign an instruction, or who get killed.
That part should be up to an independent judge, to prevent misuse.

Any serious comments ?

·

Yeah Jack Kevorkian had the right idea and they sent him to jail because he was before his time.
Many people sign DNR papers
Many Christians say that if they have to be kept alive artificially they would rather die.
So far there is no legal way to actually euthanize people so even if some Christians are for it it is not an option-yet

So far there is no legal way to actually euthanize people so even if some Christians are for it it is not an option-yet
Well : that you do not have that option is just due to the pressure by US Christians who disagree with this euthanasia option.
Here in Western Europe more and more countries have thrown off the Christian reins, and introduced an euthanasia process under strict legal controls and rules.

:)

·

I agree NoHelp. I'm not against euthanasia, society is against euthanasia, at least the majority are.

Like I said before, if I could have ended my mothers suffering, legally, I would have. She was terminal, she suffered for 10 months, at the end she weighed 80 pounds soaking wet, had to have an oxygen machine, couldn't walk by herself, had no hair left, and no finger nails or toe nails left, couldn't eat, couldn't sleep, couldn't do anything but suffer. Who would wish that on someone they love?

I do believe in God, but not in a conventional way. I don't go to church, nor do I read the bible, so I won't quote scriptures or anything else, but I do believe in God. I know, I'm a contradiction, as such, I don't need to explain my beliefs to anyone, because there isn't a "group" of people that has the same beliefs and faith that I do.

I go to doctors when I'm sick, that's what they're there for. I do know people who's religion forbids them to seek medical attention, they get no sympathy from me. If you believe that God made the world, well, then he made everything in it too, doctors, lawyers, everything.

Having said all that. If my daughter or son (both of whom I love more than anything, and I'd give my life for them in a second) were on life support, in a vegetative state, with no hope of recovery, I'd pull the plug without a seconds hesitation. Would I be remorseful? Not for what I did, but for what I couldn't do.

I agree that if the quality of life is gone then machines and all should not be used to keep you alive. Makes sense to me.

I agree that if the quality of life is gone then machines and all should not be used to keep you alive.
Yes Linda : it is terrible that there are hundreds of people having to live either in pain or as plants for years, before they die an undignified death. In my volunteer work in the local hopes I saw people kept for weeks under strong sedation because of the horrible pains they have, before they died in agony. Even dogs and cats have more dignified ends to their life !
If that is what people want themselves : fine with me. But if people prefer to die in a dignified way : why not?

I strongly support an OFFICIAL legal arrangement that one can put in one's will to ensure that one is allowed to die when all other dignified options are finished.
There is nothing to fear in dying. It is nothing but going to sleep, without ever awaking again.
All religious connotations and beliefs are up to the individual to consider. But they are just religious claims. Not facts. Just possibilities. It is up to each individual to see what is the validity of these possibilities. In my case that is nil. For others that may be different.
But it never should be that religious people decide that others are no allowed to die in dignity, because the religious people believe that you have to go on till the end.

:)

·

I liked the idea of IF you WANT to be kept alive that you should have to have THAT in writing instead of the other way around.
I know if I don't have my health I don't even like the idea of being stuck in a nursing home the rest of my life.
It's about QUALITY of life
Why be a vegetable that can't appreciate a thing cause you are so out of it and all you have to look forward to is another day of pain or another day of not even recognizing or knowing anything.

I strongly support an OFFICIAL legal arrangement that one can put in one's will to ensure that one is allowed to die when all other dignified options are finished.



A Will is not the place to cover this - a Will is read/probated following death, also does not take effect until after death.

A Will is not the place to cover this - a Will is read/probated following death, also does not take effect until after death.
Point taken. What other legal process do you suggest more appropriate?

:)

·

A Will is not the place to cover this - a Will is read/probated following death, also does not take effect until after death.

I was thinking that too. It has to be a living will that your lawyer has for when the situation arises.

Point taken. What other legal process do you suggest more appropriate?]



Living Will, Do Not Resuscitate Order - but I've posted this before. My husband was a Doctor of Pharmacy, thought he knew how to guarantee his wishes would be followed, knew he was a dying man, had a DNR, a Living Will - made his intent and wishes very well known to all his Doctors as well as family.

During his final hospitalization he was resuscitated 3 times - one time the hospital didn't have the DNR because it was in the file from his previous hospitalization and they hadn't combined the files yet (I had also handed them a copy when he was admitted); once he "simply stopped breathing" but had no cardiac complications so he was put on a ventilator; once the explanation was, "Whoops." I never would have known about the 3rd Resuscitation except for the paddle/burn marks on his chest.

He suffered beyond words for over 3 weeks. Twenty-two times they told me there was over a 60% chance that he would not live through the night.

His suffering was horrific and I had to watch this man who really was my world go through it - and I was helpless. In the end every test had been done, some of them twice, he was medically and legally brain dead, he responded to nothing (not pain, not light, not sounds) and the Social Worker appeared (I have no idea where she had been hiding for over 3 weeks), found out he had long term health care insurance and suggested I make inquiries into nursing homes. That's when I called my Attorney.

The day my husband died I fought the hospital which insisted he have dialysis while waiting for hospice to arrive. They lost the fight.

I wish I had an answer - I don't know how you protect yourself or your loved ones. I truly agonize over the whole experience and I have no idea what I could have done.

I would have died for him - and I was helpless to do anything but hold his hand and watch him pass, a shell of who he was - after over 3 horrific weeks which served absolutely no purpose.

I heard you can sue if they do not follow the DNR.

You did everything you could have. Sometimes situations happen that make a mess of things.

Yes it is hard, but to follow up with the original question, the state execution and the natural dying of someone is two different things.
The state has the right to decide the punishment and even from most of the major religions they have always reconised this right that the state has to punish criminals, As for allowing a person to die, while there should be no direct causing it, suicide, if a persons body is to the point of death and only being keep alive with machines ( not counting feeding) then a person should have the right to decide to refuse medical treatment.

Yes it is hard, but to follow up with the orginal question, the state execution and the natural dying of someone is two different things.
The state has the right to decide the punishment and even from most of the major religions they have always reconised this right that the state has to punish criminals, As for allowing a person to die, while there should be no direct causing it, sucide, if a persons body is to the point of death and only being keep alive with machines ( not counting feeding) then a person should have the right to decide to refuse medical treatment.



But how do you make certain your wishes will be followed? As I said - all of this was covered and still I was helpless.

Thanks JudyKayTee, Nohelp4u, and Fr. Chuck for your posts.
Seems that we still do not have a modus that provides some clarity on the procedure that is followed, how such a procedure is ensured, and what guarantees we have that - goodwilling - hospital staff sidesteps such clear instructions.

Also thanks JudyKayTee for your story on what you and your husband had to go through.
I am much obliged for your report !

:)

·

Box guy,

Theology is the study of god fantasy and make believe. YOu don't seem to understand the basis of your religion.

The basis of Christianity is that GodAlmighty will torment you in hell for *eternity* if you, his "beloved" creation do not follow his rules. Salvation is the only way an individual can escape this horrific situation and "go to heaven".

That is what you BELIEVE whether you understand it or not.

It is not true, you just *believe it is true*. It is religion, faith.


Choux

If you think God and Christianity are just fantasies, why is it that you insist that You alone know what these "fantasies" consist of?

Despite what you may believe about God and Christianity, and this probably stems from some emotional trauma at the hands of Christians, which is inexcusable, God loves you. :D

John 3:16 :)

The parable of the prodigal son. ;)

God loves you.
That is what you BELIEVE ...

:rolleyes:

·

But I still say if you are so sure that paradise awaits you why not go as soon as possible. It seems like a simple logic problem to me. If your here and you are sure over there is better why not go over there as soon as you can. Of course as an atheist every moment I'm here is precious because there isn't somewhere better to go, so my goal is to live as long as possible but for christians you should logically have the exact opposite goal. To live a short of a life as possible with very little sin and of course the shorter you live the less time you will have to be temped by sin.


"Paradise" is my selfish motive. :( You don't have to believe in God, you see people chase "paradise" through drugs, or sex, or materialism, or whatever happens to float their boat.

A Christ follower's life is not his own, it is surrendered to God. It is His blood that covers all sin. He calls us to love and serve others just as He has done with us. 1 John.

He tells us that this life is not about us, but of God's, Luke 14 :26-27, 33. "thy will be done."
And it isn't going to be easy: "take up your cross," "the first will be last," Blessed are the meek, the poor in spirit," there will be persecutions, etc...

But faith, hope, love, joy, peace these are the fruit of the Spirit, Galatians 5:22-23. You don't have to wait till you die for it. :D

But faith, hope, love, joy, peace these are the fruit of the Spirit, Galatians 5:22-23. You don't have to wait till you die for it.
That is what you BELIEVE !

:rolleyes:

·

Yes, it is what I believe, backed up Biblically.

I wanted to point out the error in Michaelb's logic. That error stems from common misconceptions about Christianity, perpetuated by people, in this case, who don't believe in God or Christianity. ;)

What is so special in this case is that it is the first ever Italian court decision to allow suspending of any medical treatment and (artificial) ways of sustaining life. And also that the judgment drew instant criticism from the Vatican, which condemned it as as euthanasia.



I actually disagree with the Vatican's definition of euthanasia on this.

Living wills or advanced directives allow for withholding treatment, and allowing a person to die. This even happens in the Catholic hospital I work at. ;)

I still don't see the error in my logic. Just because people chase paradise on earth doesn't really have anything to do with my argument. Even if you have everything you ever wanted on earth and have wealth of spirit, heaven would still suppose to be better. Why would you delay going there?

A Christ follower's life is not his own, it is surrendered to God. It is His blood that covers all sin. He calls us to love and serve others just as He has done with us. 1 John.

Really kids, can't we just agree to disagree already. No one is going to convince the opposing side that they are right, it isn't possible.

Quoting the bible isn't going to work, talking about your faith isn't going to work, nothing is going to work. If you all want to fight then fine, go for it, but this fight is a lesson in futility.

The atheists don't believe in God, they will do everything to dispute the existence of God, the Christians believe in God and will do everything to dispute the atheists . Do you really think that anyone is going to change their beliefs because of what is said here? If anything, the only result is anger.

So, believe what you believe, be happy with that belief, and your right to believe it. You do not have to explain or justify your belief, and doing so will get you no where.

I'm just so darn tired of all the fighting. :(

The atheists don't believe in God, they will do everything to dispute the existence of God...
Total nonsense!!
All I ask for is objective supporting evidence for the existence of a "God" deity with all the supra-natural powers as is claimed.
I have asked that thousands of time - if not more. Never has anyone really attempted to provide that evidence.

STILL theists seem to be incapable of admitting that all they BELIEVE is based on dogmatic claims that can not be checked, therefore have no basis of objective supported evidence.

My conclusion therefore can only be : theists deep down know that what ever they believe is dogmatic bull manure, but can't bring themselves to admit that.

Believe whatever you want, but respect that any other world view is just as valid as your own world view. I do. Most theists can't do that.

Now : why would that be??

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

·

Boxed in Guy,

What you *BELIEVE* is just fantasy (and nonsense!)to me and a majority of folks on planet earth. :D

Total nonsense!!
All I ask for is objective supporting evidence for the existence of a "God" deity with all the supra-natural powers as is claimed.
I have asked that thousands of time - if not more. Never has anyone really attempted to provide that evidence.

It's not my job to prove it to you, and you don't really want proof Cred, you want to fight, I've read your posts. I find it very amusing that a man that doesn't believe in God spends the majority of his time on the religious boards putting down peoples beliefs and starting arguments.

When something is said that you cannot dispute, you start name calling and or picking out spelling errors etc. You amuse me. What do you hope to accomplish? Do you want people to stop believing in God, give up and come to your side? What is all this arguing and fighting about? Can't you just accept peoples beliefs?

Tell you what, you want proof that God exists, well I want proof that he doesn't. Substantial proof, not just, can you see him, no, therefore he doesn't exist. Don't quote the bible, because I don't believe in the bible. Prove it to me.

Good luck. :)

It's not my job to prove it to you...
You do not have to defend that what you believe. Reason why I only ask religious people to provide objective supported evidence for what they suggest to be the "truth" when they try to limit the freedom of others who have a different world view and opinion.

Religious people may from me be against euthanasia. No problem. If they want to die in pain and without any dignity : Amen! So be it.
But it is not their right to decide - based on their religious views - that I am not permitted to decide on the way and moment of my own death, when the time for that comes.

===

I refer to my previous post, where you conveniently failed to skip the following :

You stated :

The atheists don't believe in God, they will do everything to dispute the existence of God...
To which I replied :

Total Nonsense !
Note that you were lying there : there are only very few Atheists - if any at all - who argue the existence of God. Why would they waste their energy on that wild claim?

I never claim that "God" does not exist. I know I can not prove that "God" does not exist, while theists can not even prove that "God" does exist. So why bother on that?
All I ever do is asking theists (who make religious claims that may limit me in having different views) to provide me with objective supporting evidence that "God" exists. So far I have never seen any of that...
All atheists doing everything to dispute the existence of God? Total nonsense !!! Complete Bull waste !!!

Please note that the topic here is euthanasia and religion.

:rolleyes:

·

I'm done, stick a fork in me (not literally). I agree with your views on euthanasia, and I agree that no one has a right to force their beliefs on others. But, isn't that what you're trying to do?

All I said is stop fighting already, agree to disagree and move on. This is all a complete waste of time, that's my opinion, but I'm done fighting for it.

Do what you will, say what you want, just remember one thing. Some people's beliefs are very strong, and they will fight to the death to defend it. You are just egging them on, and that's not helpful, but hurtful. Think about that, please, not just you Cred, but everyone.

Peace people, I gave my opinion, and that's all, just wanted to bring a bit of peace and understanding to all of you, but once again, my words fall on deaf ears, or are misunderstood.

Good luck to all of you. :):)

Peace people, I gave my opinion, and that's all
No you did not just gave your opinion : you lied!!

I refer once more to one of my previous posts, where you conveniently failed to skip the following :

You stated :

The atheists don't believe in God, they will do everything to dispute the existence of God...
To which I replied :

Total Nonsense !
Note that you were lying there : there are only very few Atheists - if any at all - who argue the existence of God. Why would they waste their energy on that wild claim?

I never claim that "God" does not exist. I know I can not prove that "God" does not exist, while theists can not even prove that "God" does exist. So why bother on that?
All I ever do is asking theists (who make religious claims that may limit me in having different views) to provide me with objective supporting evidence that "God" exists. So far I have never seen any of that...
All atheists doing everything to dispute the existence of God? Total nonsense !!! Complete Bull waste !!!

So Altenweg :

WHY DID YOU LIE WITH YOUR : "atheists don't believe in God, they will do everything to dispute the existence of God"

And - WORSE - why don't you address this , or even try to skip this completely ?

:rolleyes:

·

OMG, fine, when I said I gave my opinion, I meant my opinion on euthanasia.

Did I lie, no, I didn't lie, I stated what I believed was true. I don't know anything about atheism, because I don't care to know. I do have a friend that's atheist, and his belief is that God does not exist, plain and simple, the end, he's constantly trying to prove to me that God does not exist. It wasn't a lie Cred, it's stating what someone who is an atheist said to me and told me of his beliefs. That's it. You just have to make a big deal about every little thing, don't you?

And like I said before, it's not my job to prove to you that God exists, if you really want to know then find the proof yourself. I don't need proof, nor am I going to look for it. I believe what I believe for reasons of my own. I've said before, I'm probably the only person you've ever met that believes in God but not the bible, believes in God but not in church. I don't belong to any religious group, I will not listen to one mans opinion on God. I can't prove God exists and you can't prove he doesn't, done, finished, neither one of us is going to change the others opinion.

As for saying that atheists don't believe in God and will do everything to dispute the existence of God, well if that's wrong I apologize, like I said, that's my friends point of view, and he is in fact an atheist.

Happy?

Did I lie, no, I didn't lie, I stated what I believed was true. I don't know anything about atheism, because I don't care to know.
So, while being aware that you do not know anything about atheism, you still stated :

The atheists don't believe in God, they will do everything to dispute the existence of God...
And you added here that you do not even care to know. That makes it even worse !
You lied, and you stated that deliberately, because you knew that you "don't know anything about atheism, and because you don't care to know". Never the less you accused all atheists of doing everything to dispute the existence of God...

In view of my response, showing you to be lying, you now apologize. You could not do otherwise, and it sounds far from sincere.


Thank you for showing the real you, the real Altenweg...

:rolleyes:

·

And thank you for continuing to show the real you Cred. You are a very angry man, for some reason or other you aren't happy and you do everything you can to belittle others and start fights. I feel sorry for you.

Was I sincere when I apologized, yes, if I made a mistake, then I do apologize. I shouldn't have based one mans beliefs (my friend who is an atheist) in my opinion of all. But you do it all the time, so I thought it was fair game, I guess you feel that only you can do that, no one else.

Unlike you, I have no desire to explore other religious or non religious beliefs, I have better things to do with my time. I respect your right to believe what you want, I do not respect the fact that you constantly put down other people's beliefs and try to shove yours down their throats.

Even if I had substantial, tangible proof that God exists, you still wouldn't believe, that's not why you are here, you just want to cause dissention. You claim to want a discussion on religion, but all you do is name call and put people down.

The people who know me, know who and what I am, that's all that matters to me, your opinion of me doesn't matter one little bit.

Good luck. :)

I respect your right to believe what you want, I do not respect the fact that you constantly put down other people's beliefs and try to shove yours down their throats.
A ludicrous statement. I have NEVER condemned anyone's religious belief. Nor have I EVER told anyone that he/she should not believe whatever suits him/her. Prove me wrong if you can. You can't.
Because I respect everyone's right to believe whatever suits them.

But that right does not mean that you can lie here deliberately - like you did here. Or that you may make wild claims, like so many do here. All I ask people is to put "I believe that" in front of their religious claims. But almost all here refuse to do that. While they know that no religious statement can be based on facts, but on belief only. So who are the intolerants here?

The point is not that you apologized for your deliberate lie. You simply had to apologize, as the evidence was clearly visible and could not be denied.
But now who is whining here? Talk about a very angry person, who for some reason is not happy and does anything to sidestep and gloze over her dishonest and intolerant behavior on this board...

I feel sorry for you !


Even if I had substantial, tangible proof that God exists, you still wouldn't believe
If you had... But you don't have that, because it does not exist!! And why do you suggest that I than still wouldn't believe? That is another wild claim by you ! You have no idea what I would do.

If you had Objective Supported Evidence towards the existence of "God" and for "God" being the "Creator", I would accept that evidence.

But you and I know that such OSE does not exist, and never will exist. And THAT is your real problem, and cause for your frustration !

:rolleyes:

·

Whatever Cred. Believe what you want, makes no difference to me. Peace. :)

Whatever Cred. Believe what you want, makes no difference to me. Peace. :)
I see you can't prove me wrong...

Peace to you too, Alt.

:rolleyes:

·

I see you can't prove me wrong ...

Peace to you too, Alt. !

:rolleyes:

·

Not my job to prove you wrong, I know what I believe, and I know who and what I am, and that's all I need. You want proof find it yourself. Good luck.

:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

And - WORSE - why don't you address this , or even try to skip this completely ?

Cred, gag me you skip many questions... there you go again 1 set of rules for you one for everyone else.
Alty ignore him.

Not my job to prove you wrong, I know what I believe, and I know who and what I am, and that's all I need.
So that allows you to deliberately LIE once more here in this topic within 24 hours?

I do not need that proof : I know that proof does not exist. It is you who suggested to have that proof, but as soon as your bluff is called you disappear with your tail between your legs...

How wonderful evolution is to allow for that!!

:D :rolleyes: :p ;) :D

·

I plan to Bushg. I can't believe I got sucked in again. But this time, it was more for amusement and entertainment. It's funny to watch the lengths he'll go to to try and prove he's right.

Cred, quote your little heart out, this is better than cable. :)

I plan to Bushg. I can't believe I got sucked in again. But this time, it was more for amusement and entertainment. It's funny to watch the lengths he'll go to to try and prove he's right.

Cred, quote your little heart out, this is better than cable. :)
Damm right lol :)

So that allows you to deliberately LIE once more here in this topic within 24 hours?

I do not need that proof : I know that proof does not exist. It is you who suggested to have that proof, but as soon as your bluff is called you disappear with your tail between your legs ....

How wonderful evolution is to allow for that !!!

:D :rolleyes: :p ;) :D

·

Your such a funny man. You are lying. You said you wanted proof, and that if I had that proof you would believe. Now you say you don't need proof, because it doesn't exist. Which is Cred? You keep contradicting yourself. Go ahead, you don't even need me here to prove what I've been saying, every time you open your mouth you prove me right about you. You're great at digging your own grave, I don't even need to hand you shovel. :)

Your such a funny man. You are lying.
I am lying ?


I respect your right to believe what you want, I do not respect the fact that you constantly put down other people's beliefs and try to shove yours down their throats.

Reaction by Credendividis :


A ludicrous statement. I have NEVER condemned anyone's religious belief. Nor have I EVER told anyone that he/she should not believe whatever suits him/her. Prove me wrong if you can. You can't.
No Alt. I am not lying. You are. For the second time in the same topic within 24 hours... That must be a record, even here...

:D :D :D :D :D

·

Can't you come up with something original Cred?

As for lying, yes you did. It's funny how you only see others mistakes and not your own.

You just keep saying the same thing over and over again, run out of arguments Cred?

Well, I have better things to do then talk to you. My kids are back from their play date and I’m going to go spend some time with them, that should give you some time to find the best comeback. Go look at all my posts, quote, and then spin it anyway you want. I look forward to seeing what you came up with.


:D :D :D :D

Look, I can post big insincere greenie smiles too. :)

You going to point out my spelling errors now? After all, that's all you have left. :)

As for lying, yes you did.
I am lying ?


I respect your right to believe what you want, I do not respect the fact that you constantly put down other people's beliefs and try to shove yours down their throats.
Reaction by Credendividis :


A ludicrous statement. I have NEVER condemned anyone's religious belief. Nor have I EVER told anyone that he/she should not believe whatever suits him/her. Prove me wrong if you can. You can't.
No Alt. I am not lying. You are. For the third time in the same topic within 24 hours... That surely must be a record, even here...

:D :D :D :D :D

·

Ha, ha, I see that you've run out of arguments Cred, just keep repeating yourself, it won't make your statements any more true. I do believe you are at a loss for words, how amusing.

Let me guess what comes next, the same post, yet again, with only one word changed, third to fourth. Am I right Cred, or can you come up with something original?

:D :D :D :D :D

More big grins for you.

Altenberg post #56 Jul 14, 2008, 05:35 AM


"The atheists don't believe in God, they will do everything to dispute the existence of God"

That was your first lie here, and you had to admit later that it was indeed a lie.

===

Altenberg post #65 Jul 15, 2008, 11:58 PM


"(1) I do not respect the fact that you constantly put down other people's beliefs and try to shove yours down their throats.
That was a deliberate misrepresentation, which you refuse to support with evidence ...

(2) Even if I had substantial, tangible proof that God exists, you still wouldn't believe, that's not why you are here, you just want to cause dissention"
That were two lies and/or misrepresentations...

Credendovidis post #66 Jul 16, 2008, 01:59 AM


"(1) A ludicrous statement. I have NEVER condemned anyone's religious belief. Nor have I EVER told anyone that he/she should not believe whatever suits him/her. Prove me wrong if you can. You can't.
Because I respect everyone's right to believe whatever suits them.
But that right does not mean that you can lie here deliberately - like you did here. Or that you may make wild claims, like so many do here. All I ask people is to put "I believe that" in front of their religious claims. But almost all here refuse to do that. While they know that no religious statement can be based on facts, but on belief only. So who are the intolerants here?
The point is not that you apologized for your deliberate lie. You simply had to apologize, as the evidence was clearly visible and could not be denied.
But now who is whining here? Talk about a very angry person, who for some reason is not happy and does anything to sidestep and gloze over her dishonest and intolerant behavior on this board .....
I feel sorry for you !"

(2) If you had ... But you don't have that, because it does not exist !!! And why do you suggest that I than still wouldn't believe? That is another wild claim by you ! You have no idea what I would do.
If you had Objective Supported Evidence towards the existence of "God" and for "God" being the "Creator", I would accept that evidence.
But you and I know that such OSE does not exist, and never will exist. And THAT is your real problem, and cause for your frustration!"


No serious reply received from Altenberg against this post...

===

Altenberg post #75 Jul 16, 2008, 03:03 AM


"Your such a funny man. You are lying."
That was a nonsensical statement, as it does not specify anything. Of course not : you can not specify that, as I did not lie.

Another unsuppported misrepresentation based on frustration instead of on reality.

===

And once I call your bluff of lies, you disappear with your tail between your legs, just to re-appear later with more lies...

AT LEAST I DEFEND AND SUPPORT MY STATEMENTS - UNLIKE YOU...

What a sad and frustrated person you are Altenberg !

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

·

If you had Objective Supported Evidence towards the existence of "God" and for "God" being the "Creator", I would accept that evidence.
But you and I know that such OSE does not exist, and never will exist. And THAT is your real problem, and cause for your frustration!"

As I have asked you before what would you do if you die and then DO [what would your reaction be]have to face God?
And he says here is your objective supportive evidence but now it is too late.

have to face God? and he says here is your objective supportive evidence but now it is too late.
That is similar to asking me "what would you do if you die and then have to face the Flying Spaghetti Monster .... "
It's an irrelevant question as there is no proof for either to exist.

Dear Linda : I am already 40 years passed that type of "Pascal Wager" argument.

:rolleyes:

·

See you in the other topics Alt.
It is so much more fun with you :D

Some people just don't get the inconsistency in their arguments.:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Let me guess where he'll post, on the religious boards per chance?
Another deliberate misrepresentation. I hardly ever post an a religious board.
I do post on many non-religious boards, and on the religious DISCUSSIONS board.
Since when do you have to be a theist to post on that discussions board?


I'd never go to an Atheism board
There is not even an Atheism board here. Nor an Evolution board.
And for you not even your personal favorite : a "LIE WHENEVER YOU LIKE IT" board.

:rolleyes:

·

When you clash with me - like here - I have no option. But my preference does not go out to communicate with deliberate lying b*tches...

Lol I knew he was a sexist... wow his true colors keep on shining.:p

Ok, let me get bored over a thread and stop reading it and it goes to pot.
Ok after reading and desiding maybe the last at least 3 or 4 pages need to be deleted, after doing it to most of the last page,
It is easier on this one to close it, I won't move it to the removed post board, but for heavens sake, keep on subject

And I will say this, both sides, you don't do personal comments about the other, you address the issues, not the personality of the other.

Post closed

knew he was a sexist...wow his true colors keep on shining.:
As usual an incorrect conclusion : my preference does neither go out to communicate with deliberate lying b*sterds...

:rolleyes:

·

When you clash with me - like here - I have no option. But my preference does not go out to communicate with deliberate lying b*tches ....

lol I knew he was a sexist...wow his true colors keep on shining.:p

Nah his true colors are not limited in any way especially when it comes to Americans in general.

... you don't do personal comments about the other, you address the issues, not the personality of the other.
What about the lying and deliberate misrepresentations, Chuck?
Are you so biased that you refuse to see the continuous deliberate personal non-topic attacks by Altenweg. Nohelp4u, and bushg ? Is that an example of Christian honesty and righteousness ?
Had I done that I would have been banned already...

The three of them can't even do without your passive support...

:(

·

Posting inconsistencies or pointing out YOUR inconsistencies is not personal attacking
Calling someone a lying b!Tch is personal attacking

Cred over and over I tell you I am not a Christian. I do not have a religious agenda. My agenda is that you treat the Christians terribly and speak ill of Americans which really pi$$es me off.

That being said I will not/do not throw their faith in their face and tell them they are crazy. If they want to pray for me good, I'll accept all the help I can get in this life. If your spaghetti monster wants to send me good wishes I will happily accept them. Maybe you should try it. You might learn to be more accepting of others that have different beliefs than you have... You harp on these poor people demanding one thing or the other from them.

You want to talk about personal attacks... you just called us Bit*hes
As I have said before one set of rules for you one set for everyone else.

Euthanasia , religion , and morality

Italian Beppino Englaro won the right to end the life of his daughter after she has been 16 years in coma due to the consequences of a road accident.

The controversial decision to end the life of Eluana Englaro is the first such ruling by an Italian court. The judgement drew instant criticism from the Vatican, which condemned it as as 'euthanasia'. Miss Englaro, 35, has been in a vegetative state ever since she was involved in a road accident aged 19. The ruling marked the end of a lengthy legal battle led by her parents.

Eluana's father based his appeal on the fact that she had been in good health and of sound mind before the accident and would not have wanted to be kept alive in a vegetative state. He has been campaigning since 1999 through the courts to have the treatment to his daughter suspended and he had been turned down six times until yesterday's ruling in Milan.

What is so special in this case is that it is the first ever Italian court decision to allow suspending of any medical treatment and (artificial) ways of sustaining life. And also that the judgment drew instant criticism from the Vatican, which condemned it as as euthanasia.

Keeping to the legal appeal period of 60 days, medical treatment keeping Eluana alive in a Milan hospital will after that period be stopped (if no further appeal procedure is started).

The Vatican calls this 'euthanasia', while all that is allowed now is stopping all further treatment - a passive process.

I note that in the US yearly many people still get killed by State organized executions.
But I never hear of gigantic protests against that format of killing by huge groups of Christians, while these same Christians made 2 years ago a big spectacle out of the euthanasia of a US coma patient.

Why would this form of euthanasia - letting nature run it's own way - not be a morally correct decision?

Is it not much more morally reprehensible to force a human being - often against his/her will - into a permanent vegetative state to die after many years without any dignity ?

Your opinion please !