🚀 go-pugleaf

Patrick Canion <pspat@opera.iinet.net.au> wrote in article <5jfgel$kn2$1@opera.iinet.net.au>...
> _nantko@xs4all.nl (Nantko Schanssema) wrote:

> I have always accepted that the basis for my argument
> is on faith alone in what the Bible teaches.
 
Fine, you are welcome to your quite remarkably silly collection of fairy storys.
Just dont try telling me that I must operate in a particular way because of some
crap in that collection of silly fairy storys thanks. Your loopy ideas are your problem. 

> >Not only do you deny any person the right to take his life and death in his own
> >hands, you also try to defend this ugly idea with something very selfish.
 
> No, from the perspective of euthanasia I am trying to deny the right
> for another person to assist someone to take another's life.  

Soorree, we allow those who require or desire assistance with anything from
starting their car to fixing their car to building a house to educating their children
to get assistance with that. No reason what so ever why that isnt just as valid
with ending your life with as much dignity and effectiveness as you can organise. 

I dont have the slightest interest in what you fundys think. You shouldnt be 
able to ram your quite remarkably silly 'christian' views down others throats. 

> I have not argued at all about suicide - something which I believe is tragic, wrong, 

Corse its not. There are plenty of situations where suicide is perfectly appropriate. 

> but also impossible to solve with a legislative response.
 
Well, you did manage to get one thing right. 

> Whilst it would appear that you view my logic as preposterous, 

He/she aint alone. 

> my desire to see as many of you as possible spend eternity in 
> Paradise, where there is only peace, not pain; is this so selfish?
 
Quite remarkably silly actually. Are you seriously suggesting that every other
group of fundys should be able to have their stupid belief system enshrined in
law so that we all get to end up in their 'paradise' whether we like it or not too ?

Barking mad. 

I dont even WANT to end up in your paradise if its got people like you in 
it thanks. Nothing remotely resembling paradise for me. It would be hell 
in fact.  And if I did think that my actions here would make a difference 
on that stuff, I would deliberately do what ensured I wouldnt get there. 

> > Perhaps for xian trying to get more souls into your so-called
> >heaven is a Good Thing, for a non-xian this boils down to trying to
> >get more people into your shop. This may be good for you, but is not
> >necessarrilly good for others, notably your clients. Even if things
> >work the silly way you describe, I prefer to take my chances and leave
> >this world the way I prefer.
 
> Fair enough - but why the need to involve someone else? 

For precisely the same reason we do with everything else Pat. Some of 
us arent very good at some things, and you dont get much practice doing 
suicide. It may well make a hell of a lot of sense to get some assistance to 
ensure that its done properly and you dont end up a vegy or worse instead. 

> Let me make a few disclaimers:
> 1.  I make no money from arguing against euthanasia.
> 2. My salvation is assured by the blood of Christ; 

Usual completely meaningless stuff so beloved of fundys. 

> it is not dependant upon my own efforts, and therefore 
> I do not need converts to earn 'salvation points'.

Your silly belief systems are your problem. Dont try 
ramming them down others throats via legislation. 

> 3. The responsibilty for building the church is Jesus', not mine.  I
> will gain no extra power or influence on Earth because of my stance.
 
> So, if by faith you accept Christianity (or maybe even if you don't), please 
> believe that I am coming from this from purely altruistic motives.
 
Soorree, doesnt give you the right to ram your quite 
remarkably silly views down others throats using legislation. 

> >>Not to mention the (IMO) inevitable moral consequences 
> >>on society of becoming de-sensitised to accelerated death.
 
We managed to survive that stuff in time of war fine. We can with assisted suicide too. 

> >Well, well, that's an exciting idea! As if societies give a shit about accelerated 
> >death. You tell the same thing to soldiers and hangmen, don't you?
 
> Well, maybe societies don't care, but when has that been excuse?  In the past 
> many a society hasn't cared about slavery - it doesn't change the absolute 
> stance on the morality of the issue.  But I care - so I'll do something about it.
 
By ramming your quite remarkably silly views down others throats via legislation.
No thanks, a rigorous separation between church and state is the only way to go. 

And if you damned fundys want to start stoning each other to death 
again over adultery, soorree, you cant, we wont allow that anymore. 

> Of course, in the end as useful as legislation is, 

Thats the way we do things now, whether you like it or not. 

> the Old Testament shows us that no amount of 
> lawmaking can make a person do the right thing.  

Thats crap too. It often does when the law imposes stuff the person doesnt
care about too much, and there is a very high risk of getting caught etc. 

Your 'old testament' is a complete dud. Hardly surprising given 
its just a quite remarkably silly collection of fairy storys.

> This has already been demonstrated in the NT - now they're proposing 
> something along the lines of "ok, well we can't legalise euthanasia, so 
> let's keep it illegal but we'll change the penalty to a $50 fine".  
 
Yep, looks like they might well work out how to 
make a obscene gesture at you damned fundys. 

> Disgusting.
 
So kill yourself. 

> Patrick Canion
> Pastor, Manning Assembly of God, Western Australia

Keep your silly fundy ideas for those who need a crutch for their minds.