True or not at that stage it can't hurt. Though I guess there is still the fine print on whether its suicide or not (on this topic). Hard to confess if you're dead. I know they have mellowed out a lot on that but not sure to what degree. A second cousin of mine was buried at the back of the cemetery in an unmarked grave. That was pre-Vatican II though. She got a marker years later.
Doctor-Assisted Suicide Is Officially Legal in Quebec
- Thread starter mentalfloss
- Start date
True or not at that stage it can't hurt. Though I guess there is still the fine print on whether its suicide or not (on this topic). Hard to confess if you're dead. I know they have mellowed out a lot on that but not sure to what degree. A second cousin of mine was buried at the back of the cemetery in an unmarked grave. That was pre-Vatican II though. She got a marker years later.
here's how a priest explained it about a young mum in our community who killed herself...he said think of her mental illness like a cancer, the chemo didn't work (her drugs) and the cancer won
I thought that was a compassionate way to explain it to a family wracked by guilt and confusion.
that's what I thought...no hell and damnation but sensitivity and kindness...he had a Christ-like approach...in actual fact I personally haven't met many priests who were any less...I've always had a good experience with priests and I am always forth right about my belief system and lack and church going...it's never been a problem, ever.
I nominate coldstream to be the first to volunteer for assisted suicide in Quebec. Either that or his mother gets a retroactive abortion.
To see where this will lead you need only look at the Netherlands, where euthenasia was legalized several years ago. It is now commonplace for comatose patients, or the elderly in various stages of dementia to be murdered absent any consent.
Belgium recently legalized the euthenasia of children, deemed to have an insufficient 'quality of life' well before they reach an age in which they can be expected to make deliberate decisions and at a level of maturity where they will be subject to 'persuasion' by others.
In fact it is now common in these countries to invent 'living wills' for relatives who have become an economic and emotional burden to the family or the state. and are in no state to make decisions for themselves.
It is a slippery slope indeed. It is incipient Naziism that will rid the nation of expensive and inconvenient 'useless eaters'.
It is a dark future that beckons.. one without moral or ethical limits. The Quiet Revolution has destroyed the soul of Quebec. The Culture of Death now rules. It deceives and it destroys.. and it accepts no governance or reason.
Belgium recently legalized the euthenasia of children, deemed to have an insufficient 'quality of life' well before they reach an age in which they can be expected to make deliberate decisions and at a level of maturity where they will be subject to 'persuasion' by others.
In fact it is now common in these countries to invent 'living wills' for relatives who have become an economic and emotional burden to the family or the state. and are in no state to make decisions for themselves.
It is a slippery slope indeed. It is incipient Naziism that will rid the nation of expensive and inconvenient 'useless eaters'.
It is a dark future that beckons.. one without moral or ethical limits. The Quiet Revolution has destroyed the soul of Quebec. The Culture of Death now rules. It deceives and it destroys.. and it accepts no governance or reason.
Last edited:
but that isn't in fact accurate: "The legislation, which grants children the right to request euthanasia if they are “in great pain” and there is no available treatment, makes Belgium the first country in the world where the age of the child is not taken into consideration. Similar legislation exists in the Netherlands, though only for children over the age of 12. In both countries, children are required to receive the consent of parents, doctors and psychiatrists."
what is your source here coldstream?
that's quite a strong conclusion
we are currently in a very dark present where others control our life and dying regardless of the pain experienced or our desire to die, unless we can do so ourselves or have a compassionate doctor/staff/ medical team willing to advance our death via pain cocktails.
There has never been any law against suicide. It is certainly deemed to be immoral, in fact a grave mortal sin by most credible religions. It is illegal to aid or abet of counsel a suicide in most jurisdictions.
The difference here is that it involves the active participation of the medical profession (who are oath bound to preserve life), and the full support of the State.. which will lead inevitably to the social acceptance of suicide and to the fatal compromise of ethical medical standards.
That's what has happened in the Benelux countries.. where Palliative Care facilities have been de-funded and closed.. leaving the terminally ill or desperately sick with NO alternative to suicide other than puttinng an immense burden of cost on loved ones. The decision will finally be based on dollars, NOT on'pain'.. ALL of which can be alleviated and tolerated by medical intervention.
It goes without saying that medical research to preserving and prolonging life has also been defunded as well. It's a nasty, deceptive game.
It is an entrance point in our culture for Evil and chaos.. that will reverberate far beyond the bounds of health care.
The difference here is that it involves the active participation of the medical profession (who are oath bound to preserve life), and the full support of the State.. which will lead inevitably to the social acceptance of suicide and to the fatal compromise of ethical medical standards.
That's what has happened in the Benelux countries.. where Palliative Care facilities have been de-funded and closed.. leaving the terminally ill or desperately sick with NO alternative to suicide other than puttinng an immense burden of cost on loved ones. The decision will finally be based on dollars, NOT on'pain'.. ALL of which can be alleviated and tolerated by medical intervention.
It goes without saying that medical research to preserving and prolonging life has also been defunded as well. It's a nasty, deceptive game.
It is an entrance point in our culture for Evil and chaos.. that will reverberate far beyond the bounds of health care.
Last edited:
yes that is what I was taught but as churches evolve along with our understanding of mental illness, things change...slowly but they do change. It usually begins first with the parish priest and grows from there.
do you have a problem with people who are dying being allowed to end their suffering?
yes I have heard that argument but it is not true...we can not always control pain, we can not make those comfortable whose lungs fill with fluid and fight for air, or cough up copious amounts of body fluid which causes agony to organs already crushed by tumors.
we live longer now and healthier than we ever have so I would say you are incorrect here
if you say it is an entrance point are you saying you have no problem with the procedure itself and are merely concerned about where it might lead?
Surely it would not lead to the glorification of war (WW1 anyone?) or capital punishment?
The medical profession is bound " to do no harm." Their oath may arguably be interpreted as not employing extraordinary means to prolong life at the expense of human dignity or the prolongation of suffering - either mental or physical.
The Vatican agrees.
"When inevitable death is imminent in spite of the means used, it is permitted in conscience to take the decision to refuse forms of treatment that would only secure a precarious and burdensome prolongation of life, so long as the normal care due to the sick person in similar cases is not interrupted."
Last edited:
The Vatican is dogmatically and irrevocably opposed to euthenasia. There is a huge difference between refusing heroic and futile efforts to prolong life, which will lead to a natural death.. and committing suicide. Which i've said before is a mortal sin. It's a line that when crossed will radically diminish the value of life, ultimately to that of a formulation of cost.
There is NO evolution of cardinal moral principles. That is an invention of modernism, one run on the the standards of moral relativism, where the only test is that of public acceptance.. or more presisely public apathy, in a world where no moral absolutes exist.. only self gratification. We've seen this move inevitably to accept virtually everything as a 'human right' when it in fact demeans absolutely the value of human life, moral agency and responsibility.
Last edited:
It is a sin of such gravity that it puts your soul in imminent jeopardy of eternal damnation. That doesn't fit into the modern social lexicon either, since if you don't believe in God, your not going to be much worried about Hell. 
thanks coldstreamIt is one that puts your soul in imminent jeopardy of eternal damnation. That doesn't fit into the modern social lexicon either, since if you don't believe in God, your not going to be much worried about Hell.
so, if someone commits suicide do you believe they go to hell....because the church no longer teaches that
also are you aware that the church believes that people can reach a level of spirituality (7 levels I think but it was too long ago to be accurate with the number) where they believe that no one on earth can judge you even the pope?
The Church has ALWAYS taught that suicide is a mortal sin, and does today. The Church does not condemn.. one's own actions does that.. with God as the ultimate Judge. But in fairness... ignorance of the law or pandering to social conventions is no excuse.. The immutable moral architecture of the universe is available to all through their conscience.. and it is by that standard that they will be Judged.
Last edited:
hm interesting that we both agree with that statement...albeit from a very different perspective but none the less, still the same
suicide is precipitated by nothing more than mental illness.
to condemn it is no different than condemning someone who dies of a physical disease.
neither are in control
euthanasia is quite different
it is a choice