by rwwff » Mon 21 Aug 2006, 11:13:40
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Heineken', 'S')ounds like a cop-out to me, not just personally but in this debate.
What if that $100,000 operation could add 10 good years to your life, and the alternative to not having it was your hospice/morphine route? Would you rather that money went into your operation or into the trigger of a bunker-buster nuke?
I know which option you'd choose if push come to shove.
1) You don't know me well enough to draw that conclusion.
2) To address your second point, I'd prefer neither. I'd prefer that money not be spent, period.
3) No medical procedure known to man that costs $100,000 can promise adding 10 good years to ones life. Thats nuts. Everyone dies, there's no sense getting overly excited about it, and throwing $100k at a problem isn't likely to result in much benefit. Both from the religious and non-religious point of view it works out the same; from faith we can prefer a dignified death, with palliative care, and eternal life; from a non-religious point of view, the day of one's death works the same in these cases, whether its at 68 or 78 years of age makes little difference.
PS: Nothing above should be construed to indicate that I don't think people should have a choice about these $100k+ excercises in sadism, but I believe it should ALWAYS BE A CHOICE, consent or forbiddance should both be considered acceptable.