Assisted dying

You are talking bollocks , this is for terminal patients with six month to live , it is two doctors and a judge , the safeguards are fine

Stop scaremonging
 
I’m wondering why you feel the need to control the life and death decisions of others? Is your God driving your thought process?
 
The key point is that state assisted suicide is a new pathway that will be inappropriately chosen by many vulnerable people and indeed exploited by others. There are no practical safeguards that can effectively prevent this outcome.
Well around 75 MPs allowed the act to pass this stage but they were insistent that to go forward, the bill would have to improve protection of the vulnable and of the medical profession.
If so then I can live with this legislation.if not I can't.
 
I’m wondering why you feel the need to control the life and death decisions of others? Is your God driving your thought process?
I'm wondering why you want to make this issue about religion, it's not - although for the social media anti-God squad it's just another bandwagon to jump on. Many religious believers support the bill and many non-believers oppose it. My view is that state controlled euthanasia and its provision as a service via the NHS is simply wrong. Their proper focus should be 100% on improving end of life care. If you want to debate the absurdity of your atheist position I'm happy to accommodate you on an appropriate thread elsewhere but here's a few arguments supporting my view on this subject set out by your fellow freethinkers in evidence to HoC Committee:
 
I'm wondering why you want to make this issue about religion, it's not - although for the social media anti-God squad it's just another bandwagon to jump on. Many religious believers support the bill and many non-believers oppose it. My view is that state controlled euthanasia and its provision as a service via the NHS is simply wrong. Their proper focus should be 100% on improving end of life care. If you want to debate the absurdity of your atheist position I'm happy to accommodate you on an appropriate thread elsewhere but here's a few arguments supporting my view on this subject set out by your fellow freethinkers in evidence to HoC Committee:
Doesn't have to be either or when it comes to improving end of life care and offering some people the choice with appropriate safegaurds.

Agree with you abour religion though, that can be debated on the religion thread for those who have a mind to but it's not what this debate is about.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.