Should A Dead Person Be Allowed To Sue For The Right To Die?


JLM
#31
Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

Any proposed laws surrounding assisted suicide that I have seen would preclude anyone with untreated depression or mental problems from choosing it.

That would be a good thing.
 
tay
#32
Quote:

She is paralyzed from the neck down, tethered to breathing and feeding tubes — but Manhattan bank manager Grace Sung Eun Lee still managed to mouth four words Wednesday.

“I want to die.”

Doctors are trying to honor Lee’s wish, but her devout parents believe that removing the tubes is suicide — a sin that would condemn the 28-year-old to hell.

They’ve gone to court to keep the terminally ill brain-cancer patient on life support, turning a heartbreaking family tragedy into a right-to-die legal battle


https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york...icle-1.1174383
 
wizard
#33
Quote: Originally Posted by WLDBView Post

My grandmother got a voting card for my grandfather in the 1997 election. Thing is he died in 1993. She corrected them though.

... thanks for the comment ...

... i've been sued twice in the same courthouse where this right-to-die petition is being heard by my dad -- AFTER HE DIED!!! this corrupt courhouse is the last place you want any important legislative decisions to be made ...

... how about someone petitioning the crown for the right to allow phony lawsuits with dead petitioners to die!
 
TenPenny
+2
#34
Quote: Originally Posted by wizardView Post

... thanks for the comment ...

... i've been sued twice in the same courthouse where this right-to-die petition is being heard by my dad -- AFTER HE DIED!!! this corrupt courhouse is the last place you want any important legislative decisions to be made ...

... how about someone petitioning the crown for the right to allow phony lawsuits with dead petitioners to die!

I wouldn't brag about being sued by your father's estate, it certainly makes you look bad.
 
tay
#35
What about a 'living will' which lays out your final wishes if you are incapacitated........
 
wizard
#36
Quote: Originally Posted by TenPennyView Post

I wouldn't brag about being sued by your father's estate, it certainly makes you look bad.

... nope, in at least two instances the petitioner named in the motions against me that were heard and endorsed by the supreme court of british columbia was my deceased dad, not his estate ...

... the judge in the matter was a corrupt old buffoon by the name of justice grant d. burnyeat ...
 
TenPenny
+1
#37
Quote: Originally Posted by wizardView Post

... nope, in at least two instances the petitioner named in the motions against me that were heard and endorsed by the supreme court of british columbia was my deceased dad, not his estate ...

... the judge in the matter was a corrupt old buffoon by the name of justice grant d. burnyeat ...


I read all about it. You should not be proud of stealing from your father and going to court after you killed him with the stress. Certainly not becoming of someone who wants to be treated like an adult. Don't worry, I know all about the legal niceties, and it makes you look like, at best, a creep, at worst, a thief. Pick your choice, which do you want to be know as?
 
wizard
#38
Quote: Originally Posted by TenPennyView Post

I read all about it.

... you did read all about? then you know i speak the truth, tenpenny ...

... sorry i have to be the one to let you know that your government is inept and corrupt ...
 
TenPenny
#39
Quote: Originally Posted by wizardView Post

... you did read all about? then you know i speak the truth, tenpenny ...

... sorry i have to be the one to let you know that your government is inept and corrupt ...

Oh, I think you have the mirror set the wrong way, buddy.
 
wizard
#40
... the motions in the supreme court of british columbia in which my dead dad was named were brought by two lawyers named robert w. taylor and jordan j. kinghorn of the vancouver law firm taylor veinotte sullivan ...

... yes, the bc government does allow lawyers to name dead people in their petitions and it should not be allowed ...
 
PoliticalNick
#41
Quote: Originally Posted by wizardView Post

... the motions in the supreme court of british columbia in which my dead dad was named were brought by two lawyers named robert w. taylor and jordan j. kinghorn of the vancouver law firm taylor veinotte sullivan ...

... yes, the bc government does allow lawyers to name dead people in their petitions and it should not be allowed ...

I don't really want to know what you did to have your dad's lawyers sue you after his death but there must be some merit in the case for it to go forward.

This isn't about your issues with being sued by a dead person anyway, you probably deserve it. This case is about setting a precedent for all other cases like it after. It is far cheaper and more expedient to finish this case and set a standard than start from scratch on a new version of the same case.
 
Cannuck
#42
Quote: Originally Posted by In Between ManView Post

And just look at all the wonderful things "progress" has given us so far. God's been kicked out of the public schools

God was never in them
 
JLM
#43
Quote: Originally Posted by TenPennyView Post

Yes, that's progress, I agree.

Kids saying the Lords Prayer every morning was ridiculous.

Why would that be?
 
PoliticalNick
+1
#44
Because not everyone in school is Christian. How's that for a start. Because we have laws about the separation of church & state. That's another good reason. You need anymore?
 
JLM
#45
Quote: Originally Posted by PoliticalNickView Post

Because not everyone in school is Christian. How's that for a start. Because we have laws about the separation of church & state. That's another good reason. You need anymore?

I don't think either of those two fly. Perhaps you can link me to the laws dictating the separation of church and state? Doubt if you'll find one.

Quote: Originally Posted by PoliticalNickView Post

Because not everyone in school is Christian.

So you think the Christian kids should be denied the right or desire to recite the Lord's Prayer?
 
PoliticalNick
+1
#46
Quote: Originally Posted by JLMView Post

I don't think either of those two fly. Perhaps you can link me to the laws dictating the separation of church and state? Doubt if you'll find one.



So you think the Christian kids should be denied the right or desire to recite the Lord's Prayer?

They can say the prayer all they want at home or in church or even on the playground if they like. The school (ie state) just cannot sponsor it. How hard is that to understand. Maybe you're JW and believe all should be indoctrinated into your god's fold. Point is public school is paid for by tax dollars and is very multi-theological these days. Catering to one religion over all the others is not a good policy for avoiding lawsuits.
 
JLM
#47
Quote: Originally Posted by PoliticalNickView Post

They can say the prayer all they want at home or in church or even on the playground if they like. The school (ie state) just cannot sponsor it. How hard is that to understand. Maybe you're JW and believe all should be indoctrinated into your god's fold. Point is public school is paid for by tax dollars and is very multi-theological these days. Catering to one religion over all the others is not a good policy for avoiding lawsuits.

Wrong again Nick, I was confirmed in the Anglican Church about 55 years ago and to be honest I haven't been active for over 50 years. I don't see how the Lord's Prayer can offend anyone as it's not limited to Christianity, just being thankful for the food we have and forgiving our enemies. This country was mainly settled by Christians and I don't think their desires should be curtailed. We welcome all faiths here and don't try to curtail there desires and beliefs. While I personally have no problem with whatever anyone wants to believe I do have a problem with those who try to curtail other's beliefs. If Christianity is so abhorrent to immigrants, just remember no one forced them to come here.
 
Cannuck
#48
Quote: Originally Posted by JLMView Post

So you think the Christian kids should be denied the right or desire to recite the Lord's Prayer?

They can recite it all they want just like Muslim kids can pray all they want. School is for lernin' though.
 
PoliticalNick
#49
Quote: Originally Posted by JLMView Post

Wrong again Nick, I was confirmed in the Anglican Church about 55 years ago and to be honest I haven't been active for over 50 years. I don't see how the Lord's Prayer can offend anyone as it's not limited to Christianity, just being thankful for the food we have and forgiving our enemies. This country was mainly settled by Christians and I don't think their desires should be curtailed. We welcome all faiths here and don't try to curtail there desires and beliefs. While I personally have no problem with whatever anyone wants to believe I do have a problem with those who try to curtail other's beliefs. If Christianity is so abhorrent to immigrants, just remember no one forced them to come here.

It is not about curtailing Christianity. It is about not having Christianity forced on those that are not Christian or just not interested. Nobody is saying you cannot believe in your god or your church's teachings. You just can't make everyone in a school pray to him/her/it. Once there is an official state sponsored religion you have a theocracy, not a democracy.
 
JLM
#50
Quote: Originally Posted by PoliticalNickView Post

It is not about curtailing Christianity. It is about not having Christianity forced on those that are not Christian or just not interested. Nobody is saying you cannot believe in your god or your church's teachings. You just can't make everyone in a school pray to him/her/it. Once there is an official state sponsored religion you have a theocracy, not a democracy.

In the 12 years I was in school I never once saw any child "forced" to recite the Lord's Prayer, but you know there's a smart way around this, recite the Lord's Prayer on Monday, the Sikh's Prayer on Tuesday, the Jew's Prayer on Wednesday and so on. It's impossible to separate God from State, for those who believe in God he is in every aspect of their lives and for those who don't it doesn't matter!
 
PoliticalNick
#51
Quote: Originally Posted by JLMView Post

In the 12 years I was in school I never once saw any child "forced" to recite the Lord's Prayer, but you know there's a smart way around this, recite the Lord's Prayer on Monday, the Sikh's Prayer on Tuesday, the Jew's Prayer on Wednesday and so on. It's impossible to separate God from State, for those who believe in God he is in every aspect of their lives and for those who don't it doesn't matter!

The easier solution is not to say any prayers.....oh, wait.....somebody already thought of that....

You seem to be missing the point of state sponsored religion. It elevated one group of citizens to a higher standing in the government. We become a theocratic nation just like Iran and Saudi Arabia. What follows is laws based on religious teachings. And I'm not talking the 10 commandments I'm talking the Spanish Inquisition which was a direct result of theocratic government. Same thing with ancient Rome, they used the Christians as lion bait because the state sponsored a different religion.
 
Cannuck
#52
Quote: Originally Posted by JLMView Post

....and for those who don't it doesn't matter!

...but it does matter.
 

Similar Threads

28
Cats person *OR* Dog person
by westmanguy | Mar 28th, 2007
no new posts