Quote:
Originally Posted by iTaliAN_ICe
I disagree. I think most people reach a point sometime in their life at which they question their religious beliefs and find out what they truly believe in. I was raised as a Christian but decided that religion wasn't really my thing, so I decided to abandon it. This person decided that her religious beliefs were very important to her, but I don't think that makes her judgment any more clouded than mine.
|
I did the same, although my father was always anti-organized religion so I had a starter for ten. When I was a child, religion was very important to me. At one point I attended mass every morning and totally believed my raison d'etre was to become a nun in the catholic church.
My beliefs changed. This woman might have changed her course had she lived long enough.
The point is organized religion should not propound death by refusal of vital medical treatment, in which case she would never hold such a belief in the first place.
Quote:
|
Medical treatment isn't being withheld against her will, and that's what matters. It was offered, and she refused.
|
The premise is the same, it's witheld. The reasons for witholding it differ but the result is the same.
If someone is ill in hospital and the medical staff withold treatment they are prosecuted as criminals. By that premise, she is a criminal. And what about the medical staff? They are by definition caring people. What a terrible position to put them in.
Quote:
|
I'm sure she made arrangements for her children before making her decision. Plus, if it is suicide as you claim, is it healthy for children to be raised by a suicidal mother?
|
She wasn't suicidal. She did commit suicide in my view, but she wasn't depressed or suffering any condition which would constitute unfitness for parenthood.
Whatever "arrangement" she did or did not make for her childrens' care, it was her responsibility to care for them herself.
I don't agree with this at all. It's something I see every day with divorced people and particularly women. The divorce makes them very bitter and they do everything they can to prevent the husband having contact with the children. Then something happens, the mother is out of the picture and the children are left to a father they don't even know.
She leaves behind a husband who has a business which he needs to run in order to provide for his family. How is he gonna take care of them and run the business?
So they'll be cared for by other people, who will have to rearrange their whole lives because of her choice (looking after twins is exhausting for a young mother, it will be devastatingly so for older grandparents) or else the children will be farmed out to childcare.
Quote:
|
These people are making a conscious decision, and I still don't see any problem with it.
|
So long as it doesn't affect anyone else, fine. It's like saying you can do what you want so long as it's within the law and doesn't hurt anyone else.
Quote:
|
I see your point, but again, I'm sure the children will be taken care of. Is their father still alive? If not, the children can be raised by uncles or grandparents.
|
Already answered above.
Quote:
|
Modern medicine, though beneficial, is unnatural. What I was saying was that if her life had followed its natural course (free of modern medical intervention,) she would have died anyway.
|
Well nature does nothing but kill you. If we followed nature, we'd be living in caves and chewing on bones, wondering why our toes were turning black and falling off with the cold.
She lived in a modern house with modern appliances and accepted the benefits of modern living...that being the case, why refuse the most crucial one?
Linear Mode
