51% of US doctors put religion before human life

[The Guid]

I think ultimately the the Doctors who respect the patients right to choose their future/healthcare are the ones in the right - quite frankly I would hope that 100% of Doctors would say so and do so except in the case of inability to make decisions based on sound mind.

The problem with equating strong religous feeling with the "invisible Dwarf" is that the delusions are easily proven with the "invisible Dwarf". The "invisible" friend is quite clearly not there - in most cases the patient will insist that the Dwarf/pixie can be seen and has spoken to them. Religous feeling is more subtle, I think there are very few religous people who would claim to have "seen" God or even had certain correspondence with God. I have had conversations with God but I fully accept the possibility that these were just other elements of my own psycke - I didn't actually see or hear anything with my physical body. That is a suble difference perhaps you had not considered.

I would like to point out some of the dangers of assuming that Doctors know better. The right to choose one's own treatment is as important for atheists as it is for those with a sense of the divine. Look at the way America is going, it seems to be heading further for the Religous right every minute - what is to stop this affecting the medical profession and starting to make things like abortion difficult to come by? You might think this irrelevant but these are often life or death situations & a Doctor acting "in best interests of the patient" could force pregnancies to come to term arguing that the baby is as much the patient and indeed a mother could not be of "sound mind" if she wanted to kill her own child. That's why you need to associate mental instability with such things as clear delusions as respected by the world of psychiatry.

[Justforfun000]

I just realized though that in one sense of the word, these people are still hypocrites because if I had a strong religious belief that I wanted to be put to death Kevorkian style because my "time has come" and illness was not to be suffered through when terminal, then would they do it?

See if the shoe is on the OTHER foot, all of a sudden my religious beliefs don't matter. And this applies to suicide too, does it not? Isn't that still technically "illegal"? Won't this at the very least get you committed until you realize your "delusion" of wanting to die?

[Darth Wong]

I think ultimately the the Doctors who respect the patients right to choose their future/healthcare are the ones in the right - quite frankly I would hope that 100% of Doctors would say so and do so except in the case of inability to make decisions based on sound mind.

Any religious devotion which causes you to value an ethereal belief more highly than your own life is evidence that you are not of sound mind.

[The Guid]

I think ultimately the the Doctors who respect the patients right to choose their future/healthcare are the ones in the right - quite frankly I would hope that 100% of Doctors would say so and do so except in the case of inability to make decisions based on sound mind.

Any religious devotion which causes you to value an ethereal belief more highly than your own life is evidence that you are not of sound mind.

That's a personal opinion. If you have an etheral belief, truly, then you must value it more than your mortal life. Your suggestion therefore, surely, is that there is evidence that the majority of the Earth's population is not of sound mind? Must be a scary world for you.

[Darth Wong]

I think ultimately the the Doctors who respect the patients right to choose their future/healthcare are the ones in the right - quite frankly I would hope that 100% of Doctors would say so and do so except in the case of inability to make decisions based on sound mind.

Any religious devotion which causes you to value an ethereal belief more highly than your own life is evidence that you are not of sound mind.

That's a personal opinion.

Sure, like "the sky is blue" is a personal opinion. It is a fact that religious beliefs have no rational, objective basis whatsoever. Therefore, it is a fact that these people are willing to throw away their lives for no real reason, and that is a mental disorder. How is it any more reasonable to kill yourself over a religious belief than it is to kill yourself over depression? And yet people who want to kill themselves over depression are considered mentally disturbed and forced to seek counselling.

If you have an etheral belief, truly, then you must value it more than your mortal life. Your suggestion therefore, surely, is that there is evidence that the majority of the Earth's population is not of sound mind? Must be a scary world for you.

Nice Appeal to Popularity fallacy, moron. And no, I don't believe that most of the world's population is willing to kill themselves for their beliefs. Many are, and those people are usually referred to as "fanatical" when they're Muslims or "devout" when they're Christian.

[PainRack]

Sure, like "the sky is blue" is a personal opinion. It is a fact that religious beliefs have no rational, objective basis whatsoever. Therefore, it is a fact that these people are willing to throw away their lives for no real reason, and that is a mental disorder. How is it any more reasonable to kill yourself over a religious belief than it is to kill yourself over depression? And yet people who want to kill themselves over depression are considered mentally disturbed and forced to seek counselling.

Let's put it this way. If the above person refuses to accept treatment because he doesn't want to prolong his lifespan, he feels treatment is too expensive and costly for his family and he wishes to die without being cut up, will you accept it? mr friendly guy probably explains it the best.

I just realized though that in one sense of the word, these people are still hypocrites because if I had a strong religious belief that I wanted to be put to death Kevorkian style because my "time has come" and illness was not to be suffered through when terminal, then would they do it?

See if the shoe is on the OTHER foot, all of a sudden my religious beliefs don't matter. And this applies to suicide too, does it not? Isn't that still technically "illegal"? Won't this at the very least get you committed until you realize your "delusion" of wanting to die?

Wasn't the problem because doctors didn't want to be responsible for "killing" at all? Some people are naturally squeamish about being responsible for somebody else death, and technically, sucide is wrong.

However, cessation of life support doesn't appear to be an issue. Just sign the legal docs saying you don't want to be put on life support and that's it.

[The Guid]

Sure, like "the sky is blue" is a personal opinion

Totally different. You could go to any authority on the colour of the sky and the answer would be "blue." AS previously mentioned, the psychiatrists of this world do not consider religous sentiment is a sign of not having a "sound mind."

It is a fact that religious beliefs have no rational, objective basis whatsoever

I'm going to agree with you here for the sake of my argument, however there are many people who have limited access to information outside of what the, for example, creationsists would give them, but that line of argument is getting me nowhere.
OK, religous belief does not come from a rational basis. Humans,do not purely use their reason for making decisions. That does not neccessarily make us irrational. I would like to draw a comparison if I may between the love of a God and the love of another human being. Now there are numerous hurdles I could fall at when trying to get this premise through. I am not for one minute suggesting that one could deny that someone else in this world didn't exist. All I wish to point out is that it was not my reason that made me decide that I loved, for example, my nephew or my best friend. The whole concept of love is removed from reason.

Therefore, it is a fact that these people are willing to throw away their lives for no real reason, and that is a mental disorder

I must admit that I have been arguing from a rather loose footing in this case. I agree that in these cases people are throwing their lives away for no reason - nobody gains anything, nothing would be lost if they accepted a blood transfusion but to argue that anyone who accepts death due to their religous conviction is somehow not of "sound mind" offends me somewhat, so I wish to challenge it. What about anyone who, inspired by religon, go on charitable missions around the world and die in the process?

How is it any more reasonable to kill yourself over a religious belief than it is to kill yourself over depression?

Depression clouds judgement and is described as a curable mental condition. Depression is about never being able to see the good in absolutely anything and about pure misery. You actively seek to not exist, someone with religous belief does not believe death is the end.

Nice Appeal to Popularity fallacy, moron. And no, I don't believe that most of the world's population is willing to kill themselves for their beliefs. Many are, and those people are usually referred to as "fanatical" when they're Muslims or "devout" when they're Christian.

The reason people are called fanatical when they die for their religion is because they have failed to die for anything worthwhile. They have died, in a modern context, to kill others and bring no good to themselves or the world. I am not sure I would never call a muslim devout or a "Christian" "fantical".

The "popularity fallacy" I went for was that presumably, because you are convinced seemingly that all religous people are not of sound mind you are convinced that a huge proportion (I have changed my position from "most of the world's population" because the existence of majoritively atheist China had not occured to me then) of the world's population have a religion - indeed I think in a poll a while back 20% of this board are religous. Is one in every five of the people a bit of a nut?

Regards

The Guid

[DrkHelmet]

I must admit that I have been arguing from a rather loose footing in this case. I agree that in these cases people are throwing their lives away for no reason - nobody gains anything, nothing would be lost if they accepted a blood transfusion but to argue that anyone who accepts death due to their religous conviction is somehow not of "sound mind" offends me somewhat, so I wish to challenge it. What about anyone who, inspired by religon, go on charitable missions around the world and die in the process?

I have to agree, but make a distinction. Everyone seems to think that it is the same to say "I refuse all medical help because God will give me a hand." and to say "I refuse (X) treatment, but I am willing to explore other options. I've done some research and we can do (A), (B), (C), or (D) in my treatment. Doctors (M), (N), and (O) have all done procedures involving (A), (B), (C), and (D) successfully with people in my condition."

One shows wishful thinking in the invisible hand while the other shows research and logic. They both show conviction, but one has actually shown a willingness and a desire to live, and a belief in the medical system as capable of helping them, on their terms.