Assisted Suicide bill to be debated in parliament

[Nearly Sane]

Can you explain why different people have different ideas about what is right and wrong?

If our "inbuilt sense of right and wrong" comes from God, why do I disagree with you on the subject of assisted dying? I probably disagree with you on a number of other issues of right and wrong too. I doubt that we agree on the right of everybody to get married to the person they love or possibly abortion or a number of other moral issues.

I know my views on several of these issues have changed over the years as I've got more experience of the World and heard more viewpoints from other people. My sense of right and wrong is not inbuilt, it's learned.

And, of course, it's not just that you are an evil atheist but Christians disagree on this, and some disagree with Alan.

ETA even Archbishops of Canterbury disagree with each other

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn9dn42xqg4o

[Alan Burns]

As regards what you  write here you seem to imply that your conscience is your god telling you what is right. And yet I know Christians who believe that their conscience tells them the opposite to you. Why are you right and why are they wrong?

I realise I did not give a proper response to this before, so I need to redress this.

I do accept that being a Christian does not give one infallibility over determining what is right or wrong.  We are all prone to the temptation of allowing misguided human logic to override the voice of our God given conscience.  However as Christians we do have the power to pray and to refer to the divine revelations of scripture in order to determine what is the right thing to do (or not do as in the case of assisting someone's death).  Sometimes the answer to our prayers may not be what we would like - and it is then that we need to call upon the power of God's grace to help us to choose the right thing.  Sadly there seems to be a very worrying trend to try to reinterpret the teachings of the Gospels to fit in with the trends dictated by modern secular society.

[jeremyp]

I realise I did not give a proper response to this before, so I need to redress this.

I do accept that being a Christian does not give one infallibility over determining what is right or wrong.  We are all prone to the temptation of allowing misguided human logic to override the voice of our God given conscience.  However as Christians we do have the power to pray and to refer to the divine revelations of scripture in order to determine what is the right thing to do (or not do as in the case of assisting someone's death).  Sometimes the answer to our prayers may not be what we would like - and it is then that we need to call upon the power of God's grace to help us to choose the right thing.  Sadly there seems to be a very worrying trend to try to reinterpret the teachings of the Gospels to fit in with the trends dictated by modern secular society.

But presumably the Christians who reinterpret (or from their post of view, restore the correct interpretation of) the teachings of the Gospels are as convinced as you are that the power of God's grace has led them to the right answer.

Are you not at all concerned that you might have been led astray?

[Alan Burns]

But presumably the Christians who reinterpret (or from their post of view, restore the correct interpretation of) the teachings of the Gospels are as convinced as you are that the power of God's grace has led them to the right answer.

Are you not at all concerned that you might have been led astray?

Yes we should all be concerned about being led astray.  The big question is - can you recognise that you are being led astray and what is leading you astray?
It is often mentioned that the Devil's greatest weapon is to convince people that he does not exist.  CS Lewis explored the concept of the Devil's temptation strategy in his books "The Screwtape Letters" and "Screwtape Proposes a Toast".  Lewis admitted that writing these books brought him disturbingly close to experiencing the amazing power of evil.  The world we live in is a battleground between the powers of good and evil.  I believe that the powers of evil have infiltrated to the highest levels of governments and the church hierarchy.  We all need to be vigilant and recognise that we cannot fight these powers alone - we need to call upon the help of the only one who can deliver us from evil - Jesus Christ.

Lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one -  Matthew 6:13

[Gordon]

Sadly there seems to be a very worrying trend to try to reinterpret the teachings of the Gospels to fit in with the trends dictated by modern secular society.

But that is surely a problem for Christians to wrestle with rather than the rest of us: is it not more the case, and an even greater concern for you guys, that for what you refer to as 'modern secular society' these Gospels are largely irrelevant in terms of social policy, especially where Christianity is in decline.

[jeremyp]

Yes we should all be concerned about being led astray.  The big question is - can you recognise that you are being led astray and what is leading you astray?

Yes. That is the question I am asking you.

It is often mentioned that the Devil's greatest weapon is to convince people that he does not exist.  CS Lewis explored the concept of the Devil's temptation strategy in his books "The Screwtape Letters" and "Screwtape Proposes a Toast".  Lewis admitted that writing these books brought him disturbingly close to experiencing the amazing power of evil.  The world we live in is a battleground between the powers of good and evil.  I believe that the powers of evil have infiltrated to the highest levels of governments and the church hierarchy.  We all need to be vigilant and recognise that we cannot fight these powers alone - we need to call upon the help of the only one who can deliver us from evil - Jesus Christ.

Lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one -  Matthew 6:13

But how do you know that the devil didn't give you the beliefs you have? What makes you think you are less susceptible than the church hierarchy and governments?

[Alan Burns]

But that is surely a problem for Christians to wrestle with rather than the rest of us: is it not more the case, and an even greater concern for you guys, that for what you refer to as 'modern secular society' these Gospels are largely irrelevant in terms of social policy, especially where Christianity is in decline.

The teachings of the Gospels formed the foundation of western civilisation, but I fear that straying away from these teachings will bring catastrophe and chaos and evil will reign supreme.  How many wars could have been avoided by following the teachings of Jesus to love our enemies?

[Alan Burns]

But how do you know that the devil didn't give you the beliefs you have? What makes you think you are less susceptible than the church hierarchy and governments?

I believe that sincere prayer and following scripture are the best way to discern good from evil.

[Nearly Sane]

The teachings of the Gospels formed the foundation of western civilisation, but I fear that straying away from these teachings will bring catastrophe and chaos and evil will reign supreme.  How many wars could have been avoided by following the teachings of Jesus to love our enemies?

So what would Jesus have done during WW2?
Are you suggesting all Christians should be pacifists?

[Nearly Sane]

I believe that sincere prayer and following scripture are the best way to discern good from evil.

And when other Christians say they sincerely pray and follow scripture, and yet come to a different conclusion to you?

[Gordon]

The teachings of the Gospels formed the foundation of western civilisation, but I fear that straying away from these teachings will bring catastrophe and chaos and evil will reign supreme.  How many wars could have been avoided by following the teachings of Jesus to love our enemies?

You're overreaching there, Alan: for example, there are a few pre-Christian Greek guys whose influence has been highly significant.

[ProfessorDavey]

The teachings of the Gospels formed the foundation of western civilisation, but I fear that straying away from these teachings will bring catastrophe and chaos and evil will reign supreme.  How many wars could have been avoided by following the teachings of Jesus to love our enemies?

But christianity is based on the premise of collective, inherited, guilt. Effectively that you, today, are guilty because of what some long, long gone ancestor did.

How many wars would have been prevented had that notion not been embedded in western society - effectively that it is legitimate to hate or even to kill you because of what your great, great, great grandfather may have done to my great, great, great grandfather.

[SteveH]

The teachings of the Gospels formed the foundation of western civilisation, but I fear that straying away from these teachings will bring catastrophe and chaos and evil will reign supreme.

Where in the Bible s helping someone to die out of compassion for their unendurable and incurable suffering condemned?
In any case, if someone has a religious objection to euthanasia, they are free not to avail themselves of it, but why should their choice be imposed on others?

[Alan Burns]

So what would Jesus have done during WW2?
Are you suggesting all Christians should be pacifists?

What I was implying was that Hitler would never have started the war if he had followed Christ's teachings.
Hamas would never have killed innocent Jews.
ISIS would not have persecuted other religions.
Putin would not have invaded Ukraine.

Of course we need to defend ourselves from evil actions - but if more people followed the teachings of Jesus there would be less need to defend ourselves.

[SteveH]

What I was implying was that Hitler would never have started the war if he had followed Christ's teachings.
Hamas would never have killed innocent Jews.
ISIS would not have persecuted other religions.
Putin would not have invaded Ukraine.

No mention of Netanyahu or the I"D"F, I notice.

[Nearly Sane]

What I was implying was that Hitler would never have started the war if he had followed Christ's teachings.
Hamas would never have killed innocent Jews.
ISIS would not have persecuted other religions.
Putin would not have invaded Ukraine.

Of course we need to defend ourselves from evil actions - but if more people followed the teachings of Jesus there would be less need to defend ourselves.

I take it you also think then that the British Empire is decidedly unchristian?

[Nearly Sane]

Where in the Bible s helping someone to die out of compassion for their unendurable and incurable suffering condemned?
In any case, if someone has a religious objection to euthanasia, they are free not to avail themselves of it, but why should their choice be imposed on others?

Why does it matter if it's a ' religious objection'? Surely this is a matter of conscience and people are allowed to vote on that as they like? If there is assisted dying then you are forcing people to live in a society with it. That's also a restriction of choice.

[ProfessorDavey]

Of course we need to defend ourselves from evil actions - but if more people followed the teachings of Jesus there would be less need to defend ourselves.

But the point is - who decides what actions are acceptable and which are unacceptable.

Given that you have clearly indicated that you'd vote to retain a ban on assisted dying. And presumably you'd still do so if by some weird quirk of fate you were the only person who turned up so the decision would be yours alone. And were assisted dying to be made lawful can you confirm whether (if you had the chance) you'd vote to make it unlawful again.

On those assumptions the answer to 'who decides?' seems, in your opinion, to be ... err ... you. Yet you still claim not to be restricted others choices nor to be imposing your views on others.

Now, don't get me wrong - I think there are times when a society should place restrictions on others. I gave an example of speed restrictions. I support them and I'd vote in favour of them were I given the chance. But I am honest in also recognising that were I to do this I'd be restricting choices (in this case to drive at any speed on likes without risk of sanction) and I'd be imposing my view on others. But I'd consider this to be legitimate rather than disingenuously claiming not to be restricting choice nor imposing my view on others.

[Aruntraveller]

If there is assisted dying then you are forcing people to live in a society with it. That's also a restriction of choice.

Isn't that the same for a lot of moral issues, though?

Put simply it's a restriction of choice to have seat belt laws, isn't it?

Surely what we have to do is to try to arrive at some consensus about balancing individual needs against societal needs (I very nearly said the needs of the many against the needs of the few, or one).

[ProfessorDavey]

If there is assisted dying then you are forcing people to live in a society with it. That's also a restriction of choice.

But no-one is forced to avail themselves of it. If we allow choice there will be some who don't like a thing we allow - that isn't really forcing people in any meaningful sense provided they aren't forced to avail themselves of the ting they don't like.

I can't stand musicals - they are lawful. Does that mean I'm forced to live in a society with musicals. Not really unless society forces me to attend musicals. I can simple choose not to attend musicals.

[SteveH]

But no-one is forced to avail themselves of it. If we allow choice there will be some who don't like a thing we allow - that isn't really forcing people in any meaningful sense provided they aren't forced to avail themselves of the ting they don't like.

I can't stand musicals - they are lawful. Does that mean I'm forced to live in a society with musicals. Not really unless society forces me to attend musicals. I can simple choose not to attend musicals.

I share your distaste for musicals, which have been described as "opera for stupid people".
Your general point is spot-on. NS's comment was a rather desperate and confused attempt to come up with a counter-argument.

[Aruntraveller]

Whereas operas are musicals for condescending people.

[SteveH]

I take it you also think then that the British Empire is decidedly unchristian?

I dare say he does: not many people nowadays think the British Empire was a good thing.

[ProfessorDavey]

Whereas operas are musicals for condescending people.

Not a fan of opera either.

[Nearly Sane]

I share your distaste for musicals, which have been described as "opera for stupid people".
Your general point is spot-on. NS's comment was a rather desperate and confused attempt to come up with a counter-argument.

It wasn't a counter argument at all. It's just the idea that restriction is wrong doesn't seem an absolute, and it can depend on how you view something as to whether it's a restriction. I presume anyway you support a lot of laws which retrruct choice such as drinking age?