dialamah

That seemed a bit of a hodge podge, but let me see if I got the main gist of it. People are concerned about assisted suicide because they are worried about: 1. People with mental challenges being manipulated into signing documents calling for their own death; 2. Troubled kids being manipulated into signing documents calling for their own death; 3. The proof of this slippery slope is gay marriage: first they just wanted to get married, and now they want bakeries to provide food for their nuptials. 4. A California court ruled against a gay couple who wanted a particular bakery to provide a special wedding cake. 5. Gay people who don't want to be discriminated against will be bringing lawsuits. This is why assisted suicide is a bad idea. Do I have that about right?

If a person A signs a document allowing person B to end his life once predetermined conditions are met, and those conditions are met before person B carries out the assisted suicide, then that would be "euthanasia". If those conditions aren't met, then there may be a case for murder. You seem to think that there would be no safeguards, the law would be passed that basically would give carte blanche to anyone to kill anyone for reasons of mercy. In Oregon, they have some conditions designed to ensure the person requesting death is doing so of their own free will. There must be two requests, with a minimim waiting period between them, and a second medical opinion sought from someone neutral among other things. California has similar requirements, including a requirement that the doctor meet privately with the patient to ensure no coercion. With these kinds of controls in place, assisted suicide is not going to result in a killing spree of the old and infirm. Here's some reading on different countries and how they deal with the issue of euthanasia. https://lop.parl.ca/Content/LOP/ResearchPublications/2015-116-e.html?cat=law#a11

If someone is willing to kill for material gain or to relieve a "burden", laws against it wouldn't matter. A law allowing someone to choose to when to die has nothing to do with people killing other people, illegally.

Maybe, maybe not. If ~80% of Canadians support legally assisted suicide, that suggests to me that a lot of people would use that option themselves. For each person who chose that option, someone else could use those resources. With the increasing population of elders and increasing cases of dementia and other slow-killing diseases, those freed-up resources could be more substantial than you think. https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2015/08/28/77-of-canadians-support-assisted-suicide-poll-shows.html http://www.dyingwithdignity.ca/advance_consent_assisted_dying_poll https://www.ctvnews.ca/mobile/health/84-of-canadians-support-assisted-dying-new-poll-shows-1.2045085

Perhaps if those who wished to determine their own time to go were freely permitted to, there would be more resources for those who preferred to take the longer way.

They all follow the scriptures, including you. Its just that people choose what they like or don't like and make that their focus. So, judging by your comments on here, you like the scriptures that let you judge others. The Christians I prefer are the ones that like scriptures that let them love others. Me: what will happen to homosexuals and women who have abortions? Christians I like: that is up to God. Betsy: they are against God and he will punish them. Both you and the Christians I like may believe those things are wrong, but Christians I like keep in mind scriptures that advise against judgement, such as Matthew 7:1-2, 1 Samuel 16:7 and Corinthians 4:4-5.

Not annoyed, amused that some people might be gullible enough to actually buy a faked photo. Were you?

The message I am promoting is "People have the right to make their own choice." I'm not surprised you don't get it. Not Christians, generally; just some Christians. Most of the Christians I know are really decent people. I only oppose those Christians who think their religious beliefs should take choice away from everyone else. Like you do, with opposing 'right to die', opposing programs supporting LGTBQ, and opposing a woman's choice when it comes to her body and her pregnancy. You can choose to live and die any way you want. You can have sex with or marry whomever you want. You can not have an abortion as often as you want. You have freedom to live your life the way you want. But because you are a certain type of Christian, you think you have the right to take those very same freedoms and choices away from others. For all those people who you vilify, call unworthy, condemn to death and torture through your God --- Who wouldn't get really depressed and think they're better off dead? What an insensitive, discouraging message it is (those Christians) send. It's downright cruel to make them feel that way. Disagreeing with what you believe does not mean I haven't read the Bible. Yours is not the only interpretation of the bible. You are not the only one who believes she has the only "right" interpretation. All Christians think they understand the word of God - and the other guys, believers or not - have no clue. Because I have so many Christians to show me what a Christian looks like, I reject your Christianity. Your Christianity is exclusionary, full of judgement and hatred for anyone who doesn't believe a you do. Yes, yes - so glad I am able to help you with your martyrdom. You poor thing, living in a country where you are FREE to believe as you wish, someone disagrees with you! The Biblical prophecy is fulfilled in you! Never mind Christians actually being hunted, jailed or killed for their faith; someone disagees with you on the internet and that's persecution! The Fear of God, huh. Yup, like I said elsewhere - a 'choice' based on fear of death/torture is no choice at all. I don't have to lie; I only have to say what I believe and you come unglued. Did you not read what WCR posted? I tell kids that they can be who they are, that they are marvellous as they are, that they are free to love and marry who they want; you tell them that they are unworthy, hateful, deserving only torture from God. I tell women that I love them, I care about their situation in life, that they have the "choice" of whether or not to bear children, that I am not going to make that choice for them; you tell them that regardless of their life circumstances they must continue a pregnancy they neither wanted nor asked for, otherwise they are unworthy, hateful, deserving only torture from God. I tell people at the end of their life that I love them, that I support their life and their choice in how they want to die; you tell them they have no choice but to suffer, otherwise they are unworthy, hateful, deserving only torture from God. Who has the more discouraging message? According to StatsCan, murder-suicides have declined since the 1980s. It's some Christian's value to put "MY BELIEF" ahead of everyone else's life, to judge others as unworthy if they don't life up to "MY BELIEF". Other Christians put "OTHER PEOPLE" ahead of "MY BELIEF"; that means they are able to live a Christian life, while not judging others as unworthy. I think the latter type truly reflect Jesus' message.

Perhaps its like gay kids listening to Christians talk about how unnatural homosexuality, and how unnacceptable they are to God, so much so that God will damn them eternally for something they cannot even control. Who wouldn't get really depressed and think they're better off dead? What an insensitive, discouraging message it is we send. It's downright cruel to make them feel that way.

More "dignified dying". A friend had liver disease and was rather sick for some time, but still functional. When a liver fails, the toxins it fails to clean up affect the entire body, including the brain. The friend had a couple of small strokes, enough to knock him out for a few days and put him in the hospital, but each time he went home he was a little less capable, a little more confused. The final time he collapsed, and the ambulance came, he refused to go to the hospital but when the attendant gave him a form to sign, he couldn't figure out what end of the pen to use even with two chances and the attendant telling him what he was doing wrong. Attendant declared him non-competant and took him to the ER. While he was hospitalized, my partner went in to his place and took out several bags of feces and feces covered items, cleaned the rest as best he could. Prior to this, the guy was a pristine housekeeper. In the hospital there was a 'family meeting' with my partner and I representing the family he didn't have. The doctor laid out the options: death, and asked "Do you want to be resuscitated next time you collapse?" Our friend said "No" and begged our forgiveness for giving up, but he was just tired and ready to go. The doctor also told our friend that the medication he was on would keep him going for a while, but if he stopped taking it he would die within 2 or 3 days, most likely. We also discussed palliative care, and the social worker who was there said she's find a place. But she didn't and the hospital discharged him and sent h8m home. He was back within 5 days, and in that time more or less forgot about his cat, whom he loved dearly, tried to go to the store without pants and re-sh*tted up his apartment. He didn't come home this final time and it cost several thousand dollars to have his apartment cleaned by a bio-hazard team, which his landlord had to pay out of pocket. So much "dignity" in suffering and dying.

Yeah, that was my mom's situation. She hated that my sister and I were cleaning her up, with or without the help of the care aids. The bed sores were horrendous, despite our best efforts, and no doubt bodily wastes accentuated the pain. Lucky for her it was only a few weeks and not a few years. Yeah. Though Betsy would have approved my mom's suffering, not sure what my mother would have chosen if she'd been offered one. The most she was offered was a DNR, which she took amd then elected to go home rather than remain at the hospital.

People who start or run businesses, provide jobs.

No, they don't and FU for even thinking that; we live in a DEMOCRACY, not a fiefdom. Those people that you consider so deserving already have too much say in political processes and in directing government. Those people that you consider so deserving do not have the best interests of either the country or other citizens at heart; their interest is in consolidating power and wealth to themselves. And you would simply give them even power to screw over the rest of us and, ultimately, the country. Yes, they should be rewarded - with more money, and better benefits. However, the 'creators of wealth' don't like that idea, do they, because it comes out of taxes and 'creators of wealth' don't want to pay more taxes. But the 'wealth creators' are the ones you'd trust to run our country? Even if the first generation of immigrants aren't the wonderful money-makers such as you expect they should be, their kids and grandkids will be taxpayers, also paying for whatever debt is left to pay after we are long gone. If we left it to non-immigrants to continue our glorious country, full of wealth creators and wealth distributors, our economy would contract and the 'wealth creators' wouldn't have enough customers for their goods and services, and would go elsewhere. You have a great plan - if you want to drive Canada into the ground and destroy it's democracy.

This doesn't make any sense to me. Can you provide some data showing that heterosexual young males are actually committing suicide at a higher rate than LGBTQ young males? By the way, this from Stats Canada; it's not specific to youth, but to suicide overall among all age groups:

I know you don't believe in data and all, but the cites I provided indicated that gay/bi/transgender kids attempt suicide at a rate 5 to 8 times higher than straight kids. Presumably, that would translate to gay/bi/transgender kids succeeding at suicide at a rate 5 to 8 times higher than straight kids. So no, it's not the same and no, boys are not committing suicide at the same rate (even if for similar feelings of rejection and disenfranchisement) as gay/bi/transgender kids.

What exactly are they imposing that you disagree with? Is it that they support the right of a gay couple to marry? Or for a woman to choose to have an abortion? As far as I know, those are the only two specifically bits of 'ideology' a Christian might disagree with. Polls, however, do seem to indicate that the majority of Canadians actually support gay marriage (70%) and abortion (77%). Not to mention, these things are not being "imposed" on you, because you - as an individual - are free to do as you wish, to marry someone of the opposite gender, and not have an abortion. On the other hand, if you had your way, I would not be free to do as I wished, whether to marry someone of the same gender, or have an abortion. Is there some other way that I'm missing that NDP and Liberals "impose" things on Christians?

No, but it seems you are angry with the government for not imposing your choices on the rest of us.

I think people commit suicide when they feel rejected, unlovable, hopeless and alone. Christians, Muslims, Sikhs, rednecks and anyone else who thinks that LGBTQ youth are 'going through a phase', 'will grow out of it', 'don't know what they want' and 'are making a choice' are telling these kids that they are rejects, unlovable, unaccepted and alone. If there are programs in our schools and in society that give kids a different message to offset the negative ones given by religion and social conservatives, I'm all for it.

Imposing what, exactly, on society? The freedom for people to 'make their own choice', as you keep telling us God supports? Imposing the idea that we aren't living in a theocracy and therefore we aren't all subject to your views of morality? I am so glad I'm a liberal-minded person, that I actually believe in the right of people to make their own choices, and not a religious person, preaching love and 'morality' while simultaneously condemning people to death for failing to follow my particular set of beliefs. Perhaps (some) Christians need to take a page from the extremist Muslims to set up their own Christian land, where everyone follows the rule of the Bible - whether they want to or not, and under pain of death. Honestly, I thought better of you.

You are right, men do commit suicide at a higher rate than women. But in this thread, I believe we are talking about, generally, the Christian attitude toward homosexuality. And the articles I cited weren't 'opinions', they were actually studies on actual, collected data, by experts in their field. But I understand that in the post-knowledge world, some people prefer to dismiss experts, facts and evidence in favor of their own uninformed opinion.

But you said you oppose school programs designed to keep LGBTQ people from committing suicide, here: I don't agree with schools teaching on LGBTQ because they are basically teaching it is normal. So-called gay-straight alliances are another thing that projects it as normal and acceptable and so I could not support it. . Yes, counselling would help. Acceptance would help even more.

I'm ignoring the part about 'duping citizens by spending money', because that's irrelevant to the topic I'm interested in talking about. It hardly matters where "too much" money is being spent; you might think a new prison in Ontario is exactly what is needed to house criminals and provide jobs in the region; I might think it's a complete waste of money because crime rates are dropping, and it's obvious that the Government is just duping people with a bit of fear-mongering and the potential of jobs. Just one example; I'm sure there are many more we would actually disagree on. So, if I make $100,000.00 a year, how much mortgage can I afford? If I make $1,000,000.00 a year, how much mortgage can I afford? Should I should I not go into debt to get that mortgage? Should my family live in a shack, to avoid going into debt?

Read all about it: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3935661/ http://www.sprc.org/sites/default/files/migrate/library/SPRC_LGBT_Youth.pdf Etc., just do a bit of googling.

I asked you if a choice of do it or die is a real choice. I see you don't want to answer. Fair enough.

So you support a doctrine that encourages non-acceptance of LGBTQ in schools and in society. People who do not feel accepted by their peers or within their society are much more likely to self-harm, to attempt suicide and to succeed at suicide. If all life is valuable, according to God, then should not programs that save lives be supported by Christians? Or are only some lives valuable to God? But, really - I know the answer; the only life that is valuable to God is the one that worships and obeys him. I know you aren't responsible for how people other than yourself treat LGBTQ people, and that you are a well-meaning and no doubt very good Christian. Still, it is a doctrine that you believe and that you support that ultimately creates such despair among young people that they will die by their own hand. https://egale.ca/backgrounder-lgbtq-youth-suicide/