[Mouse]

As a brief side bar to this discussion let me address Yorick’s point. I believe it’s concerning the recent discussion on how we handle religion and topics that touch on matters of faith here. The basic rule is that matters of faith can be referred to as an adjunct to the main topic. What is not permitted at present is a situation where religion becomes the main theme of the thread and leads to the unfortunate bickering that demeans both this forum and the participants.

Let me make a hypothetical response to the original post:-

I’m a Believer and my views on this are firmly rooted in my faith and I believe that the only agency that should be empowered to end the life of this unfortunate woman is my Maker. This may sound harsh, but I believe that these decisions are beyond what we, as imperfect beings have either the right or the moral ability to make. I have seen miracles myself and will pray for this woman in her situation. I would hope that should I ever be in a similar position, I will be called to join my Maker when I am ready, not when someone else decides it’s time.

Now, here are two further responses to the above. Which one do you think is acceptable, and moves the discussion on, and which is out of line.

Ok, that’s fair enough for you. You have your faith and I respect that. Just as I hope you can respect my position. It’s my firm belief that, in the absence of documentary evidence of the clearly expressed views of a patient ( DNR order, “living will” etc.) then evidence should be sought as to the views and position that the patient would have expressed should he or she still be in a position to make them. That means cutting through the agendas to those giving evidence and trying to discern the wishes of the patient. I don’t think it’s easy, and I don’t envy those who take on the burden of adjudicating in these situations. However I also think that it’s wrong to impose my beliefs on everyone. That’s why I believe that the wishes of each individual should be respected and be the primary factor in how they choose to approach their own mortality.

This is just typical of how one bunch of self-proclaimed zealots wants to impose it’s airy-fairy worldview on the rest of us. Well, I’ve got news for you. Where I come from, we don’t take kindly to anyone telling us what we can or can’t do and if that doesn’t fit with how you want to live your life, or arrange your death, then fine – there’s plenty of countries out there that I’m sure would be happy to add you to their ranks of brain dead nutjobs. Just don’t come in here spouting your mystical BS and think any of us are going to buy it for a second.

I know all the above has been exaggerated for effect, but please give it some thought. We are trying to tread a fine line here between encouraging as wide an exchange of views as possible and the general health and conduct in this area of IW. It’s been determined that “no holds barred” religious discussions are not allowed at the moment. Work with us and that might change, but for the moment, please try and understand and adhere to the rules as they stand.