Posted on 08/19/2007 1:17:54 PM PDT by wagglebee
After the seizures got really bad, the family made the decision to call the vet. She and her assistant came to our house. We gathered around Mojo, who lay quivering on the outdoor patio, and we showered him with a final round of affection. With great reverence and tenderness, the vet gave him a shot and he drifted peacefully to sleep, never to wake again.
With the vet and the assistant patiently waiting, we sat for quite a while to make our goodbyes before they wrapped him in a blanket and took him away to be cremated.
Very often, we treat dying dogs and cats more divinely and humanely than we treat dying human beings. As a pastor, I have watched doctors let dying patients suffer needlessly for the sake of avoiding exposure to lawsuits. I've seen families agonize about whether to end torturous life-extending treatments for loved ones. Many of my parishioners emphatically have told me that they do not want to be kept going with tubes and ventilators when their lives are really over.
If faithful people of many religions really believe that life is bigger than death, then why would we fight death when its natural time has come? If we know that death doesn't get the last word, then we can face it with dignity.
In June, our state had a historic opportunity to support legislation that would have allowed Californians to have more humane end-of-life options. But the state Assembly failed to bring the law, AB 374, the Compassionate Choices Act, to a vote. There is hope that it will come back to the floor of the Assembly again if enough citizens speak up for it.
AB 374 is very similar to the assisted suicide law in Oregon. The Oregon law's system of checks, balances and full medical accountability has proven effective in offering terminally ill patients a way to end their own lives before having to endure needless suffering at death. Relatively few terminally ill people have chosen to use the law, but many, many more have been comforted to know that they had the choice if they wanted it.
I hold life to be sacred, as do people who opposed AB 374 on religious grounds. But faith does not demand that we extend life artificially when it is time to die, or that we refrain from relieving the suffering of people who face terrible pain in the death process. Individual human beings are of supreme value partly because they have innate freedom of choice about how their own lives should unfold. People have a God-given right to certain choices about the manner of their own death, and it's time the law reflected this reality.
Jesus used his God-given freedom for the sake of awakening others to their freedom. He risked crucifixion because of his faith that death was a part of life, and not the other way around. His death was a vindication of life. There is a vast difference between the suicide of a person who might otherwise have been helped to have a longer, meaningful life by a therapeutic intervention, and the carefully monitored suicide of someone who is grateful for having lived out a good life in a body that is no longer viable.
May faith be brought to life by those among us who want to keep our mojo as long as we have the power to make choices, and help others do the same.
To learn more about the Compassionate Choices Act, see www.caforaidindying.org.
The Rev. Jim Burklo is the pastor of Sausalito Presbyterian Church and writes and gathers stories for the Sacred Space page on behalf of the IJ and the Marin Interfaith Council. If you would like to submit a story of no more than 400 words to Sacred Space, contact Burklo at jtburklo@yahoo.com.
Pro-Life Ping
Freepmail wagglebee or little jeremiah to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
No, there really isn't any meaningful difference.
Is there a difference between assisted suicide and following Do-Not-Resuscitate orders?
Or what it means to be human and live and die according to God’s plan.
It is an act of pride to take your own life in defiance of God’s plan for you. A Christian minister should know this. This article saddens me.
All the difference in the world.
When it comes to terminal illness, so many liberals correctly point out the problem, but totally misfire on the solution. However, the “cure” being proposed by the right-to-die supporters is worse than the disease.
The solution is to improve the treatments of the terminally ill, which should include (IMHO) legalizing greater use of natural and alternative medicines, including some which are currently illegal.
When the need arises, and it does, you must be able to shoot your own dog.
Don’t farm it out, that doesn’t make it nicer, it makes it worse.
LAZARUS LONG
Please explain.
BTW, I’m not trying to be a troll about this, I’ve just never really had a conversation with somebody on the other side of this issue, and I’m curious about that position.
It struck me that he puts the life of an animal and a human being on the same level. Both are of the same importance to him. And so, since we put down animals who are suffering or old, in his mind, we should do the same to people.
I've been surprised how often that seems to be the case.
I had a minister who usually centered her sermons around her dog. And had a "Blessing of the Pets" twice a year. At one point, she raised the question, "Do our pets go to Heaven?" And she answered this way, "I hope so, because I don't want to be in Heaven if my pets aren't there."
So, she had made the choice: worshiping God and rejoicing in His presence was no big deal. She'd rather spend some quality time with a dog.
Hey, I love my dog too. But I kinda think God is more important -- but what do I know? I'm not a minister.
The difference is between action and inaction. If a person CHOOSES to have an advanced medical directive in which no action is taken to keep them alive, the person is still going to die a natural death in accordance with God’s Will. However, when proactive action is taken with the intent to end a person’s life, it is in violation of God’s Will.
As explained in the Ten Commandments, taking the life of an innocent person is NEVER God’s Will.
***AB 374 is very similar to the assisted suicide law in Oregon. The Oregon law’s system of checks, balances and full medical accountability has proven effective in offering terminally ill patients a way to end their own lives before having to endure needless suffering at death. Relatively few terminally ill people have chosen to use the law, but many, many more have been comforted to know that they had the choice if they wanted it.
I hold life to be sacred, as do people who opposed AB 374 on religious grounds. But faith does not demand that we extend life artificially when it is time to die, or that we refrain from relieving the suffering of people who face terrible pain in the death process. Individual human beings are of supreme value partly because they have innate freedom of choice about how their own lives should unfold. People have a God-given right to certain choices about the manner of their own death, and it’s time the law reflected this reality.
Jesus used his God-given freedom for the sake of awakening others to their freedom. He risked crucifixion because of his faith that death was a part of life, and not the other way around. His death was a vindication of life. There is a vast difference between the suicide of a person who might otherwise have been helped to have a longer, meaningful life by a therapeutic intervention, and the carefully monitored suicide of someone who is grateful for having lived out a good life in a body that is no longer viable.***
By logical extension, then because the ‘minister’ is going to die at some point, and will almost certainly go through extensive physical or psychological pain through some traumatic instance at some point in his life, then the only merciful thing to do is put a .300 explosive Weatherby magnum through his underused cranium.
There is no moral injunction against giving someone medical care.
I hope no such “minister” ever tries ministering to me that way; he’d better be damn sure he’s out of my reach if he does.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic Ping List:
Please ping me to all note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.
Nazi Euthanasia
In October of 1939 amid the turmoil of the outbreak of war Hitler ordered widespread “mercy killing” of the sick and disabled.
Code named “Aktion T 4,” the Nazi euthanasia program to eliminate “life unworthy of life” at first focused on newborns and very young children. Midwives and doctors were required to register children up to age three who showed symptoms of mental retardation, physical deformity, or other symptoms included on a questionnaire from the Reich Health Ministry.
A decision on whether to allow the child to live was then made by three medical experts solely on the basis of the questionnaire, without any examination and without reading any medical records.
Each expert placed a + mark in red pencil or - mark in blue pencil under the term “treatment” on a special form. A red plus mark meant a decision to kill the child. A blue minus sign meant a decision against killing. Three plus symbols resulted in a euthanasia warrant being issued and the transfer of the child to a ‘Children’s Specialty Department’ for death by injection or gradual starvation.
The decision had to be unanimous. In cases where the decision was not unanimous the child was kept under observation and another attempt would be made to get a unanimous decision.
The Nazi euthanasia program quickly expanded to include older disabled children and adults. Hitler’s decree of October, 1939, typed on his personal stationary, enlarged “the authority of certain physicians to be designated by name in such manner that persons who, according to human judgment, are incurable can, upon a most careful diagnosis of their condition of sickness, be accorded a mercy death.”
Questionnaires were then distributed to mental institutions, hospitals and other institutions caring for the chronically ill.
Patients had to be reported if they suffered from schizophrenia, epilepsy, senile disorders, therapy resistant paralysis and syphilitic diseases, retardation, encephalitis, Huntington’s chorea and other neurological conditions, also those who had been continuously in institutions for at least 5 years, or were criminally insane, or did not posses German citizenship or were not of German or related blood, including Jews, Negroes, and Gypsies.
A total of six killing centers were established including the well known psychiatric clinic at Hadamar. The euthanasia program was eventually headed by an SS man named Christian Wirth, a notorious brute with the nickname ‘the savage Christian.’
At Brandenburg, a former prison was converted into a killing center where the first Nazi experimental gassings took place. The gas chambers were disguised as shower rooms, but were actually hermetically sealed chambers connected by pipes to cylinders of carbon monoxide. Patients were generally drugged before being led naked into the gas chamber. Each killing center included a crematorium where the bodies were taken for disposal. Families were then falsely told the cause of death was medical such as heart failure or pneumonia.
But the huge increase in the death rate for the disabled combined with the very obvious plumes of odorous smoke over the killing centers aroused suspicion and fear. At Hadamar, for example, local children even taunted arriving busloads of patients by saying “here comes some more to be gassed.”
On August 3, 1941, a Catholic Bishop, Clemens von Galen, delivered a sermon in Münster Cathedral attacking the Nazi euthanasia program calling it “plain murder.” The sermon sent a shockwave through the Nazi leadership by publicly condemning the program and urged German Catholics to “withdraw ourselves and our faithful from their (Nazi) influence so that we may not be contaminated by their thinking and their ungodly behavior.”
As a result, on August 23, Hitler suspended Aktion T4, which had accounted for nearly a hundred thousand deaths by this time.
The Nazis retaliated against the Bishop by beheading three parish priests who had distributed his sermon, but left the Bishop unharmed to avoid making him into a martyr.
However, the Nazi euthanasia program quietly continued, but without the widespread gassings. Drugs and starvation were used instead and doctors were encouraged to decide in favor of death whenever euthanasia was being considered.
The use of gas chambers at the euthanasia killing centers ultimately served as training centers for the SS. They used the technical knowledge and experience gained during the euthanasia program to construct huge killing centers at Auschwitz, Treblinka and other concentration camps in an attempt to exterminate the entire Jewish population of Europe. SS personnel from the euthanasia killing centers, notably Wirth, Franz Reichleitner and Franz Stangl later commanded extermination camps.
My father died with cancer of the liver and spine. They gave him lots of morphine. I can tell you he did not suffer at all but just quietly passed away.
“Is there a difference between assisted suicide and following Do-Not-Resuscitate orders?”
Of course. In one case, you allow natural death, in the other you help kill a human being. That is MURDER.
.
But isn’t neglect when you have the capability to save also a form of murder? Because you failed to act a person dies.
If its given its called birth.
When it is over its called death.
If life is taken, its called murder.
This only holds true if you question God’s ability to end life at any time of His choosing.
Neglect is different than DNR. If you have a duty of care, then you need to exercise that duty. If I tell you DO NOT provide care, I relieve you of that duty.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
“Is there a difference between assisted suicide and following Do-Not-Resuscitate orders?”
No, and unlike most conservatives, I think that people should be legally able to determine when their life is no longer worth living. I’m not comfortable with anyone else being able to make that decision for me — but, if I’m lucid, I should be able to make that decision for myself. It’s the ultimate in personal freedom.
Eventually, the government will decide that “unemployed” (i.e. not paying into the national insurance system)are not “worthy of life”
In the Catholic tradition, yes if certain conditions are met. I f it is reasonable certain that I am terminal, if I am in control of my senses (or prior, when I was I gave instructions), then not treating me (food and water are not treatments) then I can relieve others of any duty of medical care.
From the French Revolution forward, the hallmark of the left has ALWAYS been their belief that certain groups are not “worthy of life” and the real problem is those who stand by and do nothing because they are relieved to not be among the condemned.
No machine can prevent actual death, "natural" or otherwise. Some medical conditions cause people's bodies to withdraw nutrition via the inability to metabolise the nutrition that's been provided, just as some conditions prevent the person from getting sufficient oxygen to maintain life. No machine in the world can change that reality.
I'm thinking in terms of people who can only survive via machines.
Refusing a machine is different than doing something to intentionally cause death.
Sorry, I'm not a religious guy, but in your view, by maintaining that artificial state, is the soul "trapped" in the body, does that prevent or prolong travel to the afterlife for that person?
I don't believe souls can be trapped in that way, no, but it's possible to keep a body "alive" that has no one home.
I agree.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
This is about “duty to die”.
This is now done in socialized medicine nations. People who are deemed too old to treat. In essence, cheeper to let them die.
Yep, “useless eaters” is what the Nazis called them.
Interesting read...
I just had to put my 11 year old female Dalmatian down this last Friday...That was one of the most painful experiences of my life...
She was our (wife’s and mine) first pup we ever bought together...
I believe we gave her a good home, she never suffered or was neglected...Our lives revolved around this being for over 11 years...
My wife and I are still coming to grips with the decision, and we are going to have to spend some time getting used to not seeing her anymore...
How it puts into perspective in how we view, and value human life is still the same...
Sure, she was just a dog...But she was our dog...And she brought great joy to us...I just hope we did the same for her...
I can only write so much about this before I have to stop for a while...
Just curious about your not being a religious guy. How does that work for you in regard to your Combat Medic Prayer? Does it have any true meaning for you?
The Combat Medic Prayer
Oh Lord, I ask for your devine strength to meet the demands of my profession. Help me to be the finest medic, both technically and tactically.
If I am called to the battlefield, give me the courage to conserve our fighting forces by providing medical care to all who are in need.
If I am called to a mission of peace, give me the strength to lead by caring for those who need my assistance.
Finally, Lord help me to take care of my own spiritual, physical, and emotional needs. Teach me to trust in your presence and never-failing love. Amen
The combat medic prayer has more of personal guidelines and goals to it for me. I do believe, I’m just not a religious guy.
By that - do you mean belonging to a religious group or church - or just that you don't believe in God?
I hope I'm not getting too personal. If you are a combat solder - I pray for you and all the troops every night...so I just wondered.
It’s not too personal.
My parents are Mormon, and it just didn’t seem right to me, so when I was 16 I stopped going to church (I still went to seminary though), and when I graduated I stopped going to church. I really didn’t know anything about other religions or denominations, so I didn’t go to any church. I still believed, but because I didn’t know where to go I just didn’t do anything.
While at Basic I went to some differant services, including Catholic, Baptist, Protestant, but they just didn’t feel right to me. It wasn’t that I didn’t like the service, it was just that it leave an impression on me. The reciting of prayers didn’t feel right in the Catholic service, the position on redemption in the Baptist service didn’t feel right to me, and it seemed innapropriate to me to be playing a guiter and having such an upbeat song during the Protestant service. Not that singing praise is wrong, it was that it didn’t seem reverant or respectful to me.
The little lady in my life I don’t think has ever been to church, so she doesn’t ask me to go, and I work most Sundays. My Sgt is in school to major in Biblical Text (Or something like that), with the intent to someday be a chaplain with the Army (We are in the Reserves). When I feel the need to be spiritually fulfilled, I have a little Bible that I’ll read, and usually in the field I’ll have conversations with my Sgt and ask him any questions I have concerning religion.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.