Euthanasia conflict

[Patternedwallpaper]

Hi all,

Been trying to pick a church recently. I was raised C of E but feel it's not for me now and was going to try another. Found one I like, but it is against homosexuality, abortion and euthanasia. They are friendly and welcoming to everyone no matter what the circumstances, but just believe all 3 are wrong. I dont necessarily; i think i can square my feelings about abortion and homosexuality, but I just cant see the problem with euthanasia when a very old or ill person is suffering :(

Does anyone else have this conflict? Can you tell me your thoughts/experiences? What are the compelling religious arguments against euthanasia?

@AgileGreenSeal The other issue with euthanasia is that while it seems well-meaning and only for very needy cases it is the thin end of the wedge, in a similar way that abortion was originally intended to be extremely rare. Once the door is unlocked it just gets pushed ever wider.

The right to die becomes then the duty to die, to free up economic advantages to the younger / fitter members of society.

Exactly these points ☝Hear, hear! 👏

You can’t really say this about Christianity without qualifiers attached to each “fact” you list as most applied to a greater or lesser degree to an ancient, medieval, or modern aspect of many vastly different sects of Christianity.

There isn’t any Christian sect for which even most of those are true, it is a very ill-informed way to generalise Christianity.

Could you point out which aspects don't apply to Christianity? I'd love to be better informed.

The Latin Fathers of the Church

The ancient and medieval philosophers of the Catholic Church you mean…
Who are not wholly representative of Christianity in all its ages and forms…

Could you read a bit closer? I didn’t say such a general thing.

Is this close enough:

There isn’t any Christian sect for which even most of those are true, it is a very ill-informed way to generalise Christianity.

Could you point out which points I made which aren't true and are ill informed?

An Ill informed view of Christianity if you don't think Catholicism had any influence on other denominations.

Hang on, you're happy to be a member of a church which thinks that homosexuality is wrong?

Catholicism had an influence on some other denominations, but not all of them, and vice versa. Your mistake is in presuming that all Christianity is the worst of what certain parts and times of Catholicism had to offer, even though they never existed simultaneously.

Depends on the Christian sect and the years which are or are not true. I can’t point out any without you pinpointing which sect and which year range.

Cross posted

For which sect and what year range? That is my point, not all of what you say is true for all Christianity at any one time.

Anyway I have to bounce.

Chosen? What are you talking about? If gay people are not allowed to have sex or love or a family then how is that a choice?

The same old, same old tedious questions that are also making a statement that is false; erroneous; showing lack of understanding; wilfully 'twisting', or just repeating what Jo Bloggs down the pub; or on social meeger says because it's fits somebody's narrative. Snot fair! I have rights! How dare you even suggest there may be another way! Your god is not very nice!

Gay people ARE 'allowed' to have sex. Nobody is stopping anyone from pursuing their appetites, cravings or compulsions. As an aside, love does not equal 'sex'. As another aside, offspring are not a 'human right'. I'm sure most gay people have a family too (mums, dads, siblings?). Nobody is stopping anyone from having sex with anything, (you can shag a lettuce for all I care) just as nobody is stopping a murderer from murdering, or stopping a thief from shoplifting, or from coveting a neighbour's ox. Everyone sins, and fall short of the glory of God. Instead of moaning and shouting and complaining and stamping feet, everyone is free to do whatever it is they want to do - just be grown up enough to accept there are consequences to our choices. Simples!

This is all very vague, so I'm assuming you can't do it.

I made very clear points regarding women, covering church leadership, women as the instigators of original sin, contraception and abortion.

In Catholicism as well as other Christian denominations, women can't be church leaders - that's today, not some medieval sect.

In Catholicism as well as other denominations, artificial contraception is not allowed - that's now, currently.

Same with abortion.

What above is ill informed and untrue?

@ZingyZebra So what are the consequences of two consenting adults of the same sex having sex?

What are the usual consequences? Could be many. Orgasm? STI? Pulled muscle?

And comparing homosexuality to murder. Nice.

Don't be a silly billy. Please read with comprehension. Thank you. But if it fits your agenda, then feel free to mis-represent. The whole point was that we have all sinned in one way or another, and we all fall short of the glory of God.

@ZingyZebra So... if the consequences are no different than a heterosexual couple fucking then why is it bad?

By jove, I think you maybe getting it! They are no different. Just as it is no different to any action that falls short of God's Word. We all fall short of the glory of God. A sin is a sin is a sin - no weighing scales.

According to you.

You accord me far too much authority.

And by the way, are these personal attacks and condescending comments part of the love mentioned in your username?

Your perception is your own, and you are entitled to it. I am sorry that you feel 'personally attacked'. That's a very strong emotion. Was it the 'don't be a silly billy'? I retract it if it makes you feel attacked. My username? I don't really 'own' it - it's one of God's guidelines. Just FYI, one of the many challenges to a Christian who endeavours to follow our Lord's 'guidelines for life' is to love the unloveable. But, given your comments, I'm certain you won't personally attack me for failing from time to time. 😉

Haven't had time to catch up properly but I couldn't let this ridiculous statement slide.

Of course an 8 week old foetus is a baby. There is a lot of development taking place (various sources):

From weeks 6 to 10, your developing baby will quadruple in size and go through dramatic changes in appearance.

The baby is now around 16mm long, which is about the size of a raspberry.

Around now, the embryo becomes a "foetus", which means offspring in Latin.

Baby has now formed just about everything an adult has: bones, muscles, fingers, toes, a cute button nose–all of it! Believe it or not, they even start to get some eye colour. Fun fact: baby's taste buds are now forming, gearing up for their first meals. It’s early still, but there’s a lot of development happening.

The tiny head has started to uncurl a bit.

The eyes and nose are visible. There are little mounds where the shell of their ears will grow and their eyes are now more obvious, with eyelid folds partially covering them. This week the retinas have begun to form.

Even though you can't yet feel it, baby's tiny trunk and limb buds are now twitching and making spontaneous movements.
Your baby’s body is like a tiny jumping bean, moving in fits and starts.
your baby's lower limb buds take on the shape of paddles.

By 8 weeks, they will have shoulders and elbows, making the upper limbs project forwards.

Nerve cells in your baby's brain are branching out to form early neural pathways. The part of the brain responsible for their sense of smell is also taking shape.

The inner ear and the tongue are developing, and the roof of the mouth is coming together with the upper jaw.

There are hands at the end of their arm buds, and fingers are starting to grow.
The arms and legs are made of cartilage at this stage.

Their reproductive organs are also developing, but it’s too early to tell whether the baby is a boy or a girl.

The embryonic tail is almost gone, shrinking back to form the tailbone (coccyx).

By just 12 weeks, the baby is fully formed. NHS - All the organs, muscles, limbs and bones are in place, and the sex organs are well developed. From now on, the baby has to grow and mature.

The first sentence in your second paragraph nailed it, it’s a foetus, not a baby!

A woman is free to do to her body what she wishes and it’s of no business of yours or of your beliefs!

If the ethos of the church doesn’t fit with yours then you find another church.

IMO the three specific things here are so vastly removed from one another that it’s easy to see why someone might take issue with one and not another.

WRT abortion and homosexuality, if you don’t agree with them then don’t have an abortion and don’t enter into a gay relationship. What other people do has no bearing on your choices.

I think that euthanasia does have the potential to have an impact on all of us and on society as a whole. In principle I totally understand and sympathise with anyone’s wish to end their suffering how and when they choose without consequence.

The problem I have with it is that once a legislation is passed to make something legal, it’s a lot easier to slide that legislation into areas where people can be pressurised or even where there is an expectation of euthanasia.

Look at the Canadian model. We now have a situation there where the law and expectation has extended to people with mental illness, disability, the homeless are being given the option of euthanasia instead of actual help to come to terms with and get past their difficulties.

Coercion is a real thing here, and it’s not beyond the realms of reality where a terminally ill person may feel that euthanasia is the right thing to do by their family rather than themselves.

There is just too much scope for it to be abused for it to ever become legal practice.