I currently work as a part-time social carer to a wonderful man ‘A’, who has recently expressed his desire to die. I won’t dwell on his personal case, but it is certainly challenging me, forcing me to question subjects like the right to die, death, suffering and free will. As I try to frame my thinking as much as possible in the context of life in a Soul Community, which is my aim, I thought it more appropriate to post this in the FOTCM section.
According to wikipedia, euthanasia “refers to the practice of intentionally ending a life in order to relieve pain and suffering.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euthanasia
In an article posted on SOTT earlier this year - France moves toward legalizing "assisted death" - generally confirms my own observations from talking to patients, family and carers.
“A report recently handed to the council found that there was widespread dissatisfaction among terminally ill patients and their families over a "cure at all costs" culture in the medical establishment.”
http://www.sott.net/article/258486-France-moves-toward-legalizing-assisted-death
From another article from 2011,
"Those Swiss politicians who want to change the rules on assisted suicide behave like moral apostles," said Margrit Weibel, president of Zurich-based suicide organization Ex International. "They are backward-looking people, entangled in the Christian belief that human beings don't have the right to make decisions on when to end their lives."
http://www.sott.net/article/221857-Suicide-Tourists-Make-Swiss-Uneasy-as-Terminally-Ill-Seek-Death
So who benefits from the present system of maintaining a “cure of all costs”? Well, in ‘A’s case, he had to sell his home in order to finance his long term care. The care home is privately owned, although at one time it was council run. Although it is staffed with lovely, professional carers and well managed - it is a profit making operation. Big Pharma obviously benefit from the medication that is administered too, from a legal context, they have an obligation to make profit for shareholders. So rather than actually ask folk what they want, in terms of treatment and care, there is a general assumption that keeping someone alive, irrespective of their wishes even, is ‘caring’.
As one of my daughters pointed out though, we all have the blues occasionally, so it is important to ascertain over a period of time, that a person can make a rational decision over their life choices. If a person is suffering and feels they no longer have any quality of life, and cannot take their own life despite that being their preferred choice - forcing them to live does not seem to honour their individual free will.
The C’s mention the following regarding suicide.
Cs session: November 7, 1994
Q: (L) What happens to people who commit suicide?
A: Varies according to circumstance.
Q: (L) In a general sense, is there some negative karma involved in committing suicide?
A: There can be negative karma involved with many things.
Q: (L) What about the death penalty?
A: Specify.
Q: (L) Is putting a criminal to death the equivalent of reducing society to the level of the criminal?
A: You are all put to death.
Q: (L) What do you mean?
A: In one way or another.
Q: (L) Well, is there any negative karma on society, the judge, the jury, the executioner, if a criminal is brought to trial, found guilty of a heinous crime and then put to death?
A: What about war? What is better? This is open because all are murderers and suicides. It is the supreme lesson you all must learn before you can graduate to ethereal existence. Your thinking is too simplified.
Q: (L) Is there ever a situation where execution helps relieve the criminal of some of his karma that may be caused by the commission of the crime for which he is being executed?
A: No.
I understand (at least in theory) the Third Force principle, and that right or wrong (STO or STS) is dependant on the specific situation, and that may be what the C’s were implying.
After observing that our dog Colby was beyond help and was just needlessly suffering, I decided to have him put down. It seemed the most compassionate and responsible course of action. The night before, my girls and I all slept on the floor with him, and said our goodbyes. It remains one of the most tender, loving occasions I have experienced. I know a lot of folk on here can empathise with this scenario.
So what about other human beings who are needlessly suffering and can articulate their free will, their desire to die - whether family, friends or complete strangers?
Can there be euthanasia in a Soul Community? Personally, I would think so. What about in today’s society with the legal and moral constraints and conditioning? Apart from Strategic Enclosure and External Considering, the principle of Third Force must be so important I feel.
As I understand it, SEEing and Doing involves being responsible; even or especially when most folk around us shirk theirs - let the State make my decisions for me, as it were.
Apart from the individual lesson I have with ‘A‘, I am aware of the probability or perhaps inevitability of seeing widespread suffering (particularly in care homes initially), as the s**t hit’s the fan in the near future - cometry induced plague, food shortages, economic meltdown etc etc.
History shows us that the weakest and most vulnerable in our society are always first to suffer and any possible individual consideration invariably gives way to blatent psychopathic systematic solutions - a eugenics agenda often dressed up as ‘caring, and the state must come first’ (genocide).
The future may be ‘open‘, but for me there is enough circumstantial evidence (Laura’s work etc) to suggest that apocalyptic cometry shocks correlate directly to the lack of spiritual makeup of society.
So widespread death and suffering seems to be something, objectively speaking, to prepare for, and we may face issues, such as euthanasia, that really test us, perhaps particularly our knowledge and application of the Third Force principle.
According to wikipedia, euthanasia “refers to the practice of intentionally ending a life in order to relieve pain and suffering.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euthanasia
In an article posted on SOTT earlier this year - France moves toward legalizing "assisted death" - generally confirms my own observations from talking to patients, family and carers.
“A report recently handed to the council found that there was widespread dissatisfaction among terminally ill patients and their families over a "cure at all costs" culture in the medical establishment.”
http://www.sott.net/article/258486-France-moves-toward-legalizing-assisted-death
From another article from 2011,
"Those Swiss politicians who want to change the rules on assisted suicide behave like moral apostles," said Margrit Weibel, president of Zurich-based suicide organization Ex International. "They are backward-looking people, entangled in the Christian belief that human beings don't have the right to make decisions on when to end their lives."
http://www.sott.net/article/221857-Suicide-Tourists-Make-Swiss-Uneasy-as-Terminally-Ill-Seek-Death
So who benefits from the present system of maintaining a “cure of all costs”? Well, in ‘A’s case, he had to sell his home in order to finance his long term care. The care home is privately owned, although at one time it was council run. Although it is staffed with lovely, professional carers and well managed - it is a profit making operation. Big Pharma obviously benefit from the medication that is administered too, from a legal context, they have an obligation to make profit for shareholders. So rather than actually ask folk what they want, in terms of treatment and care, there is a general assumption that keeping someone alive, irrespective of their wishes even, is ‘caring’.
As one of my daughters pointed out though, we all have the blues occasionally, so it is important to ascertain over a period of time, that a person can make a rational decision over their life choices. If a person is suffering and feels they no longer have any quality of life, and cannot take their own life despite that being their preferred choice - forcing them to live does not seem to honour their individual free will.
The C’s mention the following regarding suicide.
Cs session: November 7, 1994
Q: (L) What happens to people who commit suicide?
A: Varies according to circumstance.
Q: (L) In a general sense, is there some negative karma involved in committing suicide?
A: There can be negative karma involved with many things.
Q: (L) What about the death penalty?
A: Specify.
Q: (L) Is putting a criminal to death the equivalent of reducing society to the level of the criminal?
A: You are all put to death.
Q: (L) What do you mean?
A: In one way or another.
Q: (L) Well, is there any negative karma on society, the judge, the jury, the executioner, if a criminal is brought to trial, found guilty of a heinous crime and then put to death?
A: What about war? What is better? This is open because all are murderers and suicides. It is the supreme lesson you all must learn before you can graduate to ethereal existence. Your thinking is too simplified.
Q: (L) Is there ever a situation where execution helps relieve the criminal of some of his karma that may be caused by the commission of the crime for which he is being executed?
A: No.
I understand (at least in theory) the Third Force principle, and that right or wrong (STO or STS) is dependant on the specific situation, and that may be what the C’s were implying.
After observing that our dog Colby was beyond help and was just needlessly suffering, I decided to have him put down. It seemed the most compassionate and responsible course of action. The night before, my girls and I all slept on the floor with him, and said our goodbyes. It remains one of the most tender, loving occasions I have experienced. I know a lot of folk on here can empathise with this scenario.
So what about other human beings who are needlessly suffering and can articulate their free will, their desire to die - whether family, friends or complete strangers?
Can there be euthanasia in a Soul Community? Personally, I would think so. What about in today’s society with the legal and moral constraints and conditioning? Apart from Strategic Enclosure and External Considering, the principle of Third Force must be so important I feel.
As I understand it, SEEing and Doing involves being responsible; even or especially when most folk around us shirk theirs - let the State make my decisions for me, as it were.
Apart from the individual lesson I have with ‘A‘, I am aware of the probability or perhaps inevitability of seeing widespread suffering (particularly in care homes initially), as the s**t hit’s the fan in the near future - cometry induced plague, food shortages, economic meltdown etc etc.
History shows us that the weakest and most vulnerable in our society are always first to suffer and any possible individual consideration invariably gives way to blatent psychopathic systematic solutions - a eugenics agenda often dressed up as ‘caring, and the state must come first’ (genocide).
The future may be ‘open‘, but for me there is enough circumstantial evidence (Laura’s work etc) to suggest that apocalyptic cometry shocks correlate directly to the lack of spiritual makeup of society.
So widespread death and suffering seems to be something, objectively speaking, to prepare for, and we may face issues, such as euthanasia, that really test us, perhaps particularly our knowledge and application of the Third Force principle.
