Death with Dignity Act

As I mentioned above in a reply - I have no problem with this as long as the person makes the decision themselves and there is some sort of witness process. Also, in the case of a living will situation (I have one - no way am I going to live as a vegetable for a decade). Who am I, or anyone, to say a person HAS to go on living. I think that is cruelty beyond words and interventionism at its worst.

The slippery slope, as some have mentioned, is when the decision is left to others. This should not be allowed except under situations of brain-death, in my opinion.

By the way, for the poster above, the Oregon law does not say a random nurse can decide if someone lives or dies. They do have input as to the technique and timing however. Also, one thing Ron Paul would not agree with is any of us telling citizens of Washington or Oregon what to do.

:-)

I'm thinking I'd hate to give the powers that be the satisfaction of watching us kill ourselves.

As human beings we used to all respect the natural law and that included birth and death. But now we think we have the right to end life as well as prolong it without regard to the consequences. I think in Oregon it's on the ballot to allow a nurse to decide when someone else is ready to be killed. Used to be called murder.

"abuse" of this act...
In addition, due to my spiritual beliefs, I say, "No". I believe in reincarnation and believe suicides have to come back and do the whole darn thing all over again...
However, I do believe it's spiritually okay to NOT accept medical treatment to prolong life...
Know that these are only my beliefs...others are free to believe as they will...

..and a guarantee of at least 3 mourners...

I may not know the truth, but I know when I'm being lied to...

A person who wants to end their lives may be breaking the law, but what can the law do to them if they break it?

On the other hand, legalizing this just screams "ABUSE". This law will be abused by self-serving people such as the bratty kids who convince dear old (nearly-dead) Dad that to end it now would be better than to put off passing on the inheritance. You get the idea.

- -
Get your own "Ron Paul for Treasury Secretary" or "Nothing Changes 1-20-09 / Vote Third Party" sticker, designed by AlaskaRon, today!
http://www.cafepress.com/thirdparty08

as my Mom had Alzheimer's and I had to witness her decline. I found myself thinking that if it ever happened to me, I would want to just wonder off and go die somewhere. I read how the initiative was written, and did not like the way it was written, so I voted against it. I personally believe we should have that right/option.

That is a tough one with good arguments on either side. My Dad died of cancer, at home, with the family caring for him his last days. The end was a painful process of dehydration and starvation. Given the opportunity, we might well have overdosed him on morphine in those final hours. He could not eat, drink or communicate, his eyes seemed to lose focus and only the low, steady doses of morphine held some of the pain in check.

On the other hand, there are people who are not immediately terminal who might well be browbeaten into suicide or just plain terminated by family who no longer wants to deal with them. There are many opportunities for abuse. I am not even sure how I would vote on such a measure since I have seen both sides.

Pat

BOHICA!!

Self Ownership. Nuff said.

Holland made euthanasia legal for terminally ill adults, then they started slipping down the slippery slope... making it legal for terminally ill children as young as 12 get euthanasia, even if their parents object.
Then allowing parents of terminally ill babies to have the babies given a lethal dose of sedatives..

"In August, the main Dutch doctors’ association KNMG urged the Health Ministry to create an independent board to review euthanasia cases for terminally ill people “with no free will,” including children, the severely mentally retarded and people left in an irreversible coma after an accident."

So, a bunch of bureaucrats get to decide who lives and who dies.
I would say, vote NO!

Then the next step will be people who are not competant and have health care proxy's, or guardians will be pushing for their right to make the decision they feel the person would have wanted etc, etc.