Terry, Why is it that whenever we have differing opinions,
that you decide that I am
the one with no discernment? Could it ever be you? Just wondering…..J Izzy
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Terry Clifton
Sent: Saturday, September 20, 2003
12:41 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Ethics
question
Discernment Izzy, Discernment.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday,
September 20, 2003 8:34 AM
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk]
Ethics question
Terry, It seems to me that the selfish thing to do is
to cling to someone by interfering in postponing their death at their own
expense. (In certain situations.) I’ve probably taken care of more
ill people than you have, and I know what that means, and that is not the
issue. Playing God can work both ways. I don’t think we should judge
people who want to stop that game. Izzy
-----Original Message-----
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Terry Clifton
Sent: Saturday, September 20, 2003
7:06 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Ethics
question
There are sins of commission, and sins of omission.
Failing to care for another as yourself is a sin of omission.
Nature does not take it's course. God put you
here and it should be God who decides when to take you out. He will
take you when He is ready, tube or no tube. When you make that decision, you
usurp His authority. You play God.
When you start considering how unfair it would be to
spend your life caring for someone who will never be able to thank you
or even acknowledge your presence, you are dwelling on self. Self is
not what it is all about. When you do it for the least of His, you
do it for Him.
Think about those things.
-------Original Message-------
Date: Friday,
September 19, 2003 21:04:44
Subject: RE:
[TruthTalk] Ethics question
Terry,
I am not talking about “snuffing†anyone. I’m
talking about ceasing from medical intervention to keep them alive, and
letting nature take its course. Quite the opposite of “snuffing
outâ€.
Izzy
-----Original Message-----
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Terry Clifton
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003
6:11 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Ethics
question
Then I take it that
your conscience would not bother you if you snuffed your hubby a day too
early?
----- Original Message
-----
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 4:35 PM
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Ethics question
Terry, You can only
make decisions upon the information you have available today. Can’t
look back tomorrow. Besides that, new medical developments take years of
R&D, and nothing just pops up unexpectedly overnight. Izzy
-----Original
Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Terry Clifton
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003
3:59 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Ethics
question
Just something to muddy the thought process. What
if you pull the plug on your patient today, and tomorrow they find the cure
that was never available before? Could happen.
-------Original Message-------
Date: Friday,
September 19, 2003 10:00:19
Subject: Re:
[TruthTalk] Ethics question
In a message dated 9/19/2003 9:51:21 AM Central Standard
Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But you state that, “I also believe
that her fate is in God's hands and he should not tamper with that.â€Â
By forcing
medical treatment upon her, you could certainly say that people are
“tamperingâ€Â.
You may be
right. I am still thinking it through. I really haven't come to
a conclusion. Laura
|
IncrediMail - Email has finally evolved - Click Here
|
____________________________________________________
IncrediMail - Email has finally evolved - Click Here
|