Ethical Opinions please

[Jozanny]

Matters are made worse by many anti-theists. To me, and many others, anti-theists are a separate group entirely. Many people are angry at religion for various reasons and turn that anger towards religions and their gods. Hating god doesn't not make one an atheist - in fact, I hold hatred of god as a purely theistic position.

I started out as an anti-theist, actually, which is why I am in some ways weaker than Dawkins, and I still have to be careful, because anger with the Roman Catholic god can get the better of me in a rant, but it also led me to eventually reject the entire model of Semitic to Christian theism.

In fairness to Christian believers, their theology drives me absolutely crazy, and get the brunt of my intellectual pushback. I single out this theology more than others, but Dawkins made some good points using Eastern faiths too.

If all of you would pardon me tho, I think Anthony's ethicial presentation is much more interesting, and we might continue with that debate?

[Judas130]

right, another viewpoint, which is deemed quite cruel, is this idea:

in the wild, if there is an injured fox...the fox will die.
in the wild, if there is a disabled, malformed, or needy deer, it will be left behind to die naturally, the strong surviving.
when we humans were a young race, disabilities would be left to nature...people would die naturally.

however, we mother our illnesses, allowing these illnesses to pass on through generations and generations...such as genetic diseases, and more to the point, we sustain life unnaturally, when naturally...these sufferers would be left to die.

now, applying this to the world today, and you'll end up with another Aryan Race/Hitler-esque thing going on. History taught us this was wrong. Though there are some benefits, such as genetic issues that would, in western civilisation, be passed on and on would die out completely.

its just another idea, however heartless. A biology teacher of mine once taught me that opinion, he believes it.

[blazeofglory]

Ethics is an interpretation or construal and as a matter of fact in reality there is nothing called unethical and it is borrowed point of view. It has no stuff at all.

When a tiger is hungry it pounces upon a deer and from the tiger's standpoint it is a moral act, a matter of fulfillment and from the deer's standpoint it is unethical.

It is simply a standpoint only not the crux of the thing.

[ClaesGefvenberg]

however two topics remain particularly taxing on my conscience. One is a matter concerncing assisted suicide, the other is of the decision to have children.

How interesting, and perhaps fitting that you choose to present those two problems in the same post: To help someone finish their own life, and to decide whether to start a new life or not. Both decisions are monumental, of course.

With assisted suicide I will introduce a case example of what could be; challenging you to make a judgment as to how it can be resolved according to your moral intuition.

Disregarding the legal problems involved, I would say yes: I am for it. I have not always held that opinion, but today I do. I had an eye opener when I was at your age: I worked summers as a temp at the local hospital, and spent some time among terminally ill people. It was a truly shocking experience, but also a very illuminating one. Some of them somehow managed to keep their good mood despite terrible pain and a generally awful situation. Others did not, but fought equally hard to stay alive.

A few expressed a will to get it over with. I was surprised to learn that they all belonged to those who were not depressed or in a state of panic. They also appeared to be of sound mind.

This applies to those who already have children as well. Do you think it was the Right decision?

Oh yes, there is no doubt in my mind that it was the right decision. It happened somewhat late in my life, when I was 35 years old: When we were prepared, mentally as well as economically, and had reached a phase in our lives when it felt right.

/Claes

[mangueken]

I have thought about euthanasia and assisted suicide for a long time. I usually come to the conclusion that it's a very individual choice and no one should be forced to do what others want in this choice. I understand some of the religious views, and if I were a believer in any of them then my only problem would be of accepting what god (or gods) dealt me and or my family.
Many things occur to me when I think of this, some of them along the lines of what Judas130, posted. For example, if a pet becomes terminally ill a lot of people, but not all, choose to have the pet put to sleep. One of the big reasons is to end the suffering that the animal is going through. It may sound cruel to compare humans and animals but it seems, to me, we have much more in common with animals than we have differences.
On the other hand, medicine continues to advance and cure things that previously killed millions. Quite a dilemma. Which is why I think it really comes down to the individuals and family members in the situation, only they can answer what they can deal with in terms of pain, belief and hope for a different tomorrow.