The Myth of Mercy Killing
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 28

Thread: The Myth of Mercy Killing

  1. #1
    GreekGoddess
    Guest

    Arrow The Myth of Mercy Killing

    Over the past several decades, America has witnessed a strange and subtle shift in how society views life. In the 1960s, the shift began as some states began to remove the criminal penalties for abortion. In the 1970s, the U.S. Supreme Court Roe v. Wade decision put the federal government’s stamp of approval on abortion nationwide. Today, the value of life is being obscured at the other end of the spectrum as courts grant the elderly and sick the so-called “right to die.” [read the full length article here]
    I found this article while searching for something similar

    It goes on as any other debate article would until you come to this:
    In A Sign For Cain, the eminent Dr. Fredric Wertham documented exhaustively the physician-sponsored mass murder of civilians in pre-World War II Germany. Well before they were dismantled and moved to the concentration camps, gas chambers were installed in six leading psychiatric hospitals. Under the guise of “help for the dying,” “mercy killings,” and “destruction of life devoid of value,” university professors of psychiatry, hospital directors and their staff members systematically exterminated hundreds of thousands of “superfluous people”—mental patients, the elderly, and sick and handicapped children. Criteria for such “undesirables” included “useless eaters,” the unfit, unproductive and misfit.

    Wertham stressed the concept of “life not worth living” was not a Nazi invention. As early as the 1920s, respected physicians wrote about “absolutely worthless human beings” and the urgently necessary “killing of those who cannot be rescued.” In fact, even in 1895, a widely used German medical textbook advocated the “right to death.”

    However, in 1939, a note from Adolf Hitler to his own private doctor and chancellery officials extended “the authority of physicians” so that “a mercy death may be granted to patients who according to human judgment are incurably ill.” Nearly the same language has been used in the various “right to die” decisions of America’s high courts.
    I would like to read other's thoughts on this article, as this specific excerpt troubles me immensely...

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    889
    Well I can only give you my twist cause I was around during Roe Wade. It was a question of choice of a woman have a right to choose reproduction. How they deal with their choice is theirs. As for the death camps this was not a choice it was imposed as upsetting as both are they are in now ways the same. As for the right to die, well again faced with modern medical things it really is about quality of life. I lost my father 3 months ago a massiave brain hemorage went quick. I got to him within 24 hrs and machines kept him alive why? Was his wish, not to prolong his life but to preserve his organs for dionation. So we all said good bye and the plug was pulled, and two people got one kidney each, his liver split into to two others, parts of his skin to burn cases, and the gift of sight to another. In short he kept his quality of life to his death, we did not preserve a body cause we could not let go. Faced with some moder medical things and getting older myself I would in many cases refuse treatment becaue while I may live I would not have a quality of life that would make me happy. Hope this helps sort stuff out.
    I believe that one of the characteristics of the human race - possibly the one that is primarily responsible for its course of evolution - is that it has grown by creatively responding to failure.- Glen Seaborg

  3. #3
    Priapistic Monk KorpDeath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    2,628
    To draw comparison's is ludricous. Although Bush may seem like Hitler sometimes, he's definitely not going for the same ends.
    Mankind have a great aversion to intellectual labor; but even supposing knowledge to be easily attainable, more people would be content to be ignorant than would take even a little trouble to acquire it.
    - Samuel Johnson

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    889
    Sorry Korp I was about when his daddy was pres and well highlight what the spelling of patato patatoe thing LOL. Thousands point of light was his daddy's catch all phrase and the answer to that was who is going to be the dim light bulb? I support fully all his efforts as this is what I must do agree with all of them I do not. Because I may oppose some of his views it has not will not ever mean I do not support his efforts. In short I respect him his effort the armed forces and what they do fully, I simply say I believe their may be other options. I pay my taxes don't lol do creative bookkeeping lots of stuff is wrong right now. Thing is being man or woman enough to devote time and effort to change it not break it more. I compare nothing I look to the past and see it repeat it's self the past is that, today is, tomorrow becomes today. History is just a day you live and live enough of them ya get old say been there done that did not work. Same ends nope but then the end should never justify the means.
    I believe that one of the characteristics of the human race - possibly the one that is primarily responsible for its course of evolution - is that it has grown by creatively responding to failure.- Glen Seaborg

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    366
    Mercy killing, a very controversial subject.

    My opinions on mercy killing, I don't think that a comparison between choosing to not prolong life and actually taking a life, whether your own or assisting someone else, is realistic. They are not the same thing.

    Taking a life is taking a life. Prolonging a life by artificial means is a choice that everyone should definately have. If the artificial means weren't there, obviously the person would die, so it stands to reason that the choice should be that person's.

    As for mercy killing, I don't think it is right, mainly because who draws the line when killing becomes mercy not murder? Who decides? What if someone makes that choice for you, and you are unable to say "no I am not ready, you don't understand" ?

    Take for example a case here where a father "assisted" his daughter's death because she was extremely retarded and unable to care for herself and her "quality" of life was non-exsistant. He is in jail right now. Read about it http://www.acl.on.ca/news/latimer98nov.html

    I don't know how anyone could determine that her life was not worth living. Playing God whether you believe in him or not is not mercy. Choosing not to prolong a life near death is a choice, not mercy.

    Just my humble opinion.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    259

    The penut gallery speaks

    Hell is full of good intentions and desires.
    Saint Bernard of Clairvaux (1091-1153)
    Alternate realities celebrate reality. If you cant handle the reality your in, then you wont be able to handle the one your attempting to escape to.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    356

    Re: The penut gallery speaks

    Originally posted here by zepherin
    Hell is full of good intentions and desires.
    Saint Bernard of Clairvaux (1091-1153)
    if i'm not mistaken that quote should read "The road to hell is paved with good intentions."
    -8-

    There are 10 types of people in this world: those who understand binary, and those who dont.

  8. #8
    AO Curmudgeon rcgreen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    2,716
    Try doing a GOOGLE search on "eugenics movement"
    It's mind blowing
    I came in to the world with nothing. I still have most of it.

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    376
    I have to say, I do agree with the idea that the ability to choose to end your life is the ultimate right that you have. I also think this article is typical of the christian "my morals are everyone morals" attitude that I see. What is wrong with letting people make there own choices, and if they are wrong then let them go to hell? why not let me go to hell if I so choose?

    This is not directed at anyone, but at the personal experience I have had with Chistian leaders from the more radical/fundamentalist side...

    Just my own opinion...
    - Jimmy Mac

    Replicants are like any technology, if there not a hazard, its not my problem....

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    263
    hmmmmm, well i want a job as a game control warden....... escentualy my job will be to hunt down the gimpy and un desirable animals so that the good strong animals will have even better chances of reproducing........ hmmmmmm when i say it just like that it does sound alittle bit.......... repeditive. but its just helping out natural selection. as cor abortion, im not saying anyting on that, but killing off things that do nothing but drag down everything else and slow down progression, that just makes sence to me to speed along natural selection...... make everything better for the world later......... when you start to move from the animal world to humans, again, im not gonna say a whole lot here, cause of its extream controversy and, hey, i dont have enuf experiance with death (and hopefully never will) to get my own solid oppinions on it other than that if someone wants to die and they have nothing left, kinda end of the rope, let em.......

    here come the negs........ i can feel them now

Posting Permissions

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