The Osteopathic Physician's Oath: Is Osteopathy really opposed to euthanasia?

Discussion in 'Medical Students - DO' started by Dr. Nick, May 19, 2002.

  1. Dr. Nick

    Dr. Nick Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2002
    Messages:
    222
    Likes Received:
    0
    Any Comments? See Italicized below:

    The Osteopathic Physician's Oath

    I do hereby affirm my loyalty to the profession I am about to enter. I will be mindful always of my great responsibility to preserve the health and the life of my patients, to retain their confidence and respect both as a physician and a friend who will guard their secrets with scrupulous honor and fidelity, to perform faithfully my professional duties, to employ only those recognized methods of treatment consistent with good judgment and with my skill and ability, keeping in mind always nature's laws and the body's inherent capacity for recovery.

    I will be ever vigilant in aiding the general welfare of the community, sustaining its laws and institutions, not engaging in those practices which will in any way bring shame or discredit upon myself or my profession. I will give no drugs for deadly purposes to any person, though it be asked of me.

    I will endeavor to work in accord with my colleagues in a spirit of progressive cooperation, and never by word or by act cast imputations upon them or their rightful practices.

    I will look with respect and esteem upon all those who have taught me my art. To my college I will be loyal and strive always for its best interests and for the interests of the students who will come after me. I will be ever alert to further the application of basic biologic truths to the healing arts and to develop the principles of osteopathy which were first enunciated by Andrew Taylor Still.
     
  2. Thread continues after this sponsor message. SDN Members do not see this ad.

  3. Slingblade the Surgeon

    Slingblade the Surgeon Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2001
    Messages:
    318
    Likes Received:
    0
    Should that have the name AT Still as part of the pledge? Hmmm maybe I'm overly sensitive to such things. Is that like worship? Perhaps it could just be "principles of osteopathy.". AT Still gets plenty of recognition elsewhere, IMHO. And wat was wrong with the original hippocratic oath? Do any DO schools use the original?
     
  4. Slingblade the Surgeon

    Slingblade the Surgeon Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2001
    Messages:
    318
    Likes Received:
    0
    We discussed this a while back...I will post the link.

    <a href="http://forums.studentdoctor.net/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=5;t=001960" target="_blank">Here tis</a>
     
  5. osteodoc13

    osteodoc13 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2001
    Messages:
    89
    Likes Received:
    0
    Doesn't the Hippocratic Oath have the same pledge in it?:

    "I will give no deadly medicine to any one if asked, nor suggest any such counsel; "

    Slingblade:
    If your read the Oath, it says to develop the principles laid out by Still. It makes no reference to worshiping Still himself.
     
  6. jhug

    jhug 1K Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2001
    Messages:
    1,323
    Likes Received:
    0
    if i'm not mistaken, the FULL hippocratic oath states something very similar! Although many school "adapt" it to make it "shorter" :rolleyes:
     
  7. Dr. Nick

    Dr. Nick Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2002
    Messages:
    222
    Likes Received:
    0
    </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by jhug:
    <strong>if i'm not mistaken, the FULL hippocratic oath states something very similar! Although many school "adapt" it to make it "shorter" :rolleyes: </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Actually the modern Hippocratic Oath goes as follows:

    I swear to fulfill, to the best of my ability and judgment, this covenant:

    I will respect the hard-won scientific gains of those physicians in whose steps
    I walk, and gladly share such knowledge as is mine with those who are to
    follow.

    I will apply, for the benefit of the sick, all measures which are required,
    avoiding those twin traps of overtreatment and therapeutic nihilism.

    I will remember that there is art to medicine as well as science, and that
    warmth, sympathy, and understanding may outweigh the surgeon's knife or the
    chemist's drug.

    I will not be ashamed to say "I know not," nor will I fail to call in my
    colleagues when the skills of another are needed for a patient's
    recovery.

    I will respect the privacy of my patients, for their problems are not disclosed
    to me that the world may know. Most especially must I tread with care in
    matters of life and death. If it is given me to save a life, all thanks. But it
    may also be within my power to take a life; this awesome responsibility must be faced with great humbleness and awareness of my own frailty. Above all, I must
    not play at God.

    I will remember that I do not treat a fever chart, a cancerous growth, but a
    sick human being, whose illness may affect the person's family and economic
    stability. My responsibility includes these related problems, if I am to care
    adequately for the sick.

    I will prevent disease whenever I can, for prevention is preferable to
    cure.

    I will remember that I remain a member of society, with special obligations to
    all my fellow human beings, those sound of mind and body as well as the
    infirm.

    If I do not violate this oath, may I enjoy life and art, respected while I live
    and remembered with affection thereafter. May I always act so as to preserve
    the finest traditions of my calling and may I long experience the joy of
    healing those who seek my help.

    "Most especially must I tread with care in
    matters of life and death. If it is given me to save a life, all thanks. But it
    may also be within my power to take a life; this awesome responsibility must be faced with great humbleness and awareness of my own frailty. Above all, I must
    not play at God."


    Clearly, the possibility of euthanasia is not dismissed.
     
  8. Dr. Nick

    Dr. Nick Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2002
    Messages:
    222
    Likes Received:
    0
    </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Slingblade the Surgeon:
    <strong>Should that have the name AT Still as part of the pledge? Hmmm maybe I'm overly sensitive to such things. Is that like worship? Perhaps it could just be "principles of osteopathy.". AT Still gets plenty of recognition elsewhere, IMHO. And wat was wrong with the original hippocratic oath? Do any DO schools use the original?</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Slingblade, I have also noticed the generally dogmatic reverence given to Dr. Still in osteopathy. I'd be interested to hear what other DOs think about this. Does it impede the evolution of the field?

    To be fair, it does pledge to "develop the principles of osteopathy which were first enunciated by Andrew Taylor Still."

    Still it is interesting. Overall though, a pretty good oath - though I personally don't agree with the deadly medicine bit.
     
  9. jhug

    jhug 1K Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2001
    Messages:
    1,323
    Likes Received:
    0
    so do they come up with a "modern" Hippocratic Oath every time there is a controversial medical topic??? If it is modern why call it the Hippocratic Oath, Hippacrates had NOTHING to do with this oath, and in my opinion-- would not agree with it!
     
  10. RockandRolldoc

    RockandRolldoc Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2002
    Messages:
    376
    Likes Received:
    0
    "I will give no drugs for deadly purposes to any person, though it be asked of me."

    This does not necessarily rule out euthanasia in my opinion. Let's remember that AT Still was really pushing the principles of Osteopathy at this time (i'm assuming the oath was developed around the time of the first American School of Osteopathy in Kirksville)... making its case, etc. One of AT Still's principles was to use as few drugs as possible. The drug issue is one of the things that caused him to swerve from Allopathic Medicine in the first place. This is not surprising because at his time, he probably saw just as many patients come in from side effects of drugs, then actual ailments. Drugs were messed up back them, a lot were just alcohol based. He was also discouraged with the inefficacy of drugs in dealing with the meningitis that killed a couple of his children. Osteopathy in its original form was about letting the body heal itself, and helping it out through manipulation, not drugs.
    Furthermore, I find it hard to believe that AT Still would be insensitive to euthanasia... especially having fought in the civil war. The suffering he must have encountered would shake up anyone, and when available, I can't imagine anyone who would let a dying soldier suffer to death without morphine... even though it seals ones fate.
    The more damaging statement in the oath concerning euthanasia is the part concerning sustaining the laws and institutions of the community. Right now physician assisted euthanasia is illegal.
    Personally, I am for euthanasia. I will also do my best to speak out for and further this liberal social philosophy that is about compassion and choice (choice implies freedom, by the way). I personally think religion is the disease, which unfortunately cannot be fixed with manipulation because it's in the mind. I would challenge anyone who is against euthanasia for religious reasons to go visit any ICU or speak to someone suffering from advanced ALS. I cannot believe the selfishness of the conservative right. I think people should have the right to choose. Others shouldn't suffer because a few twisted people live their life constantly in fear of going to hell.
    Even though I have my own beliefs, I still respect the law and would never break it. However, times will and always do change. I think that we may have to 'modernize' the osteopathic oath soon.
     
  11. jhug

    jhug 1K Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2001
    Messages:
    1,323
    Likes Received:
    0
    rockandrolldoc-- in no way am i being sarcastic -- i hope to work with you someday. We differ on this issue (I don't agree with euthanasia-- i do agree with doing all that is possible to comfort a patient without taking their life) but you are passionate and i like that. Also, when a patient comes to me requesting something of this nature i can, in good conscious, refer them to you.
     
  12. RockandRolldoc

    RockandRolldoc Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2002
    Messages:
    376
    Likes Received:
    0
    Jhug, i'm glad to hear you say that. I'm all about open minds and open hearts. They are required not only to be a good physician, but also a good person. My opinions and passions stem from my philosophy that people are all that matter. All we have is each other. If more people embraced that, this world would be a lot better place. Who knows... maybe one day we'll be on staff at the same hospital... stranger things have happened. Till then.. i wish you well and success in med school.

    --Michael
     
  13. Dr. Nick

    Dr. Nick Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2002
    Messages:
    222
    Likes Received:
    0
    Bravo RockandRollDoc! I'm with you all the way.

    BTW-I do believe Ashcroft's attempts to block euthanasia in Oregon recently got slapped down. :D
     
  14. Dr. Nick

    Dr. Nick Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2002
    Messages:
    222
    Likes Received:
    0
    </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by jhug:
    <strong>so do they come up with a "modern" Hippocratic Oath every time there is a controversial medical topic??? If it is modern why call it the Hippocratic Oath, Hippacrates had NOTHING to do with this oath, and in my opinion-- would not agree with it!</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I don't think that it is fair to say that Hippocrates had NOTHING to do with it. He, like all of us, was a product of his times (a looong time ago!). However, times change. So does Medicine. In my opinion, the modern oath is so much more appropriate to the times. In a dynamic field like medicine, change is often necessary to better respect the needs of the people we serve. Without change, stagnation and dogma become the rule.
     
  15. osteodoc13

    osteodoc13 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2001
    Messages:
    89
    Likes Received:
    0
    How convenient to be able to make up a "Modern" version of the ancient oath to fit any time you wish.
     
  16. Thread continues after this sponsor message. SDN Members do not see this ad.

  17. Dr. Nick

    Dr. Nick Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2002
    Messages:
    222
    Likes Received:
    0
    </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by osteodoc13:
    <strong>How convenient to be able to make up a "Modern" version of the ancient oath to fit any time you wish.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Well, I don't think that it is a matter of convenience.

    The modern adaptation of the hippocratic oath was written by Dr. Lasagna (yes, his real name) back in the early 60's, I believe '62 to be precise. "modern" is a relative thing. Nevertheless, I believe that it does a great job of capturing the philosophy of allopathic medicine today.

    If you don't like change, that is your perogative. As an allopathic student, however, I will be proud to take this oath.
     
  18. RockandRolldoc

    RockandRolldoc Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2002
    Messages:
    376
    Likes Received:
    0
    How convenient osteodoc? Your damn right it's convenient. It absolutely should be. Things must be able to withstand change. If not... bad things happen. Osteopathic Medicine has changed throughout the years... Read "The DO's..." by Dr. Norman Gevitz. If the Osteopathic profession had not been able to change with the times, today we'd essentially be jazzed-up CHIROPRACTORS!!! Just like science has evolved... so has society--for the better in most cases. The world is changing whether people like it or not. Some people can't handle it ( see Taliban ). The best thing that we can do as people and future physicians is to have an open mind. Take the best from everything and combine it, and drop the things that don't work. This also involves an important skill, which a lot of people never develop: Admitting we can be and are wrong sometimes. The good news is that D.O.'s are on the right track. I will also go so far as to say that we are further down the track than the MD's. We have combined all of the benefits of modern medicine,and we've also sustained a proven traditional treatment--manipulation. Osteopathic tradition is rooted in having an open mind and open heart, when most allopathic schools weren't admitting women and minorities, DO schools were. Our oath and policy behind the oath and practice should also reflect this tradition and philosophy.
     
  19. GoForIt

    GoForIt Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2002
    Messages:
    124
    Likes Received:
    0
    </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">How convenient osteodoc? Your damn right it's convenient. It absolutely should be. Things must be able to withstand change </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">We cope with changes in order to make things better. However, there are things that we should not change for the sake of convenience. Our committment to patient care should not change, and IMHO the allo oath, which is the mother of all allo med practice, should not change so conveniently. You do not see the USA constitution changes everyday, do you????
     
  20. RockandRolldoc

    RockandRolldoc Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2002
    Messages:
    376
    Likes Received:
    0
    You are right Goforit, you do not see the USA constitution change everyday. It hasn't significantly changed in 30 years!!! And before that some changes that needed to be made were not. Look at the Equal rights amendment c.1964. This is something that was clearly right and decent and beneficial, and this was not passed (thanks to that biggoted waste of oxygen redneck Strom Thurman who filibustered for over 24 hours on the senate floor)due to ignorance, selfishness, underlied by FEAR. Yes the constitution shouldn't be changed everyday... but part of the beauty of it is that it can be changed period! All I am saying is that in the right situation... the oath that underlies how we govern our profession should be most definitely modified and/or changed. Ancient oaths should not directly and implicitly correspond to 21 century medicine. If anyone sees otherwise they might as well start the Galen School of Humoral Medicine and prescribe blood lettings--I'm sure HMO's would cover it.
     
  21. BamaAlum

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2001
    Messages:
    513
    Likes Received:
    4
    RockandRolldoc,
    I respect your opinion on euthanasia, even though I disagree. However, I take extreme exception to your comments that the Conservative Right is "selfish" and that people suffer b/c "a few are afraid of going to hell." This is a standard liberal left wing comment. You assume that the majority of Americans are for euthanasia and that the "selfish" conservatives are holding it back. I think if you took a broad poll of the U.S. not just the SDN you would see that there is NOT broad support for it. Also, most people who seek religion and spirituality do not do so out of fear of Hell. That is another subject and I won't engage you here. However,you speak of the Equal Rights Amendment but then you totally bash a large percentage of the population. You are entitled to your opinion, but respect other's in return. You ask for the right to "choose," but where does that choice end? Suffering and quality of life issues are hard to determine. What about the individual who cannot speak for themselves and cannot give informed consent? Are they to be terminated as well, or are they to "suffer." How do you determine who should die and who shouldn't?
    What about the depressed are they to be terminated if they ask for it? Their emotional "suffering" could be just as valid as someone in the ICU.
     
  22. Stillfocused

    Stillfocused Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2001
    Messages:
    153
    Likes Received:
    0
    From have I know of Dr. Still theory of medicine, he had an almost religous faith in "Nature" and he had an utter zeal for human life. I do not think that Dr. Still would be a proponent of a physician killing a patient.

    The quote, "I will give no drugs for deadly purposes to any person, though it be asked of me" sounds fairly definitive to me.

    However, he might have agreed that it is often wrong to prolong someones life in the face of tremendous suffering.

    He probably would have advocated letting nature take its course in truely hopeless situations. But, who knows?

    It is awful that neither the current ostepathic (it has been updated also) nor current hippocratic oaths still include the dictum "First do no harm."

    An idea close to Still's heart.
     
  23. RockandRolldoc

    RockandRolldoc Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2002
    Messages:
    376
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm sorry that you are offended Bama, but I will stand by my comments. Any group that forces their beliefs on others is selfish. This is the conservative right whether you like it or not. It has nothing to do with race or any particular religion. I take exception to any group or philosophy that tries to tell someone what to do with their body. Whether you are emotionally hurt or completely wasting away from ALS, you have every right to take your own life. Now, we should NOT encourage people to do this. We should try to help anyone in need and when it comes to emotional suffering, there is ALWAYS hope, and help should be made available to anyone who wants it. When it comes to a horrible terminal disease that is constant pain and suffering to an individual, I think it's a little more clear cut and they should have the right to make their own decision. I have nothing against the conservative right and how they choose to live their lives as long as they keep it to themselves, but I do not want them having ANY affect on my life. Just as I will not go from bed to bed forcing terminally ill patients to euthanize, I do not expect someone to go bed to bed keeping people from doing it. I love the conservative ideal... you are free just as long as you are white and protestant, and live your life according to the bible. In ideology, I do not see much separation between Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, and Osama Bin Laden. (Yes I said it). This country is about everyone, and freedom applies to ALL. Do not tell me that the majority of this leans to the right. It is a fact that this country leans just left of center socially. Go look at any national pole, your comment is false. As long as some individuals actions do not hurt another, then they should be free to do so. Recognize that reasoning? It's what is said about freedom of speech in the first amendment. As long as you don't yell fire in a crowded theatre... your fists are allowed to be swung until you hit someone in the nose....This is what we say about free speech and I think this is just as applicable to the individual and their body. I know many conservatives who agree with this.
     
  24. Stillfocused

    Stillfocused Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2001
    Messages:
    153
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hippocratic Oath -- Classical Version

    I swear by Apollo Physician and Asclepius and Hygieia and Panaceia and all the gods and goddesses, making them my witnesses, that I will fulfil according to my ability and judgment this oath and this covenant:

    To hold him who has taught me this art as equal to my parents and to live my life in partnership with him, and if he is in need of money to give him a share of mine, and to regard his offspring as equal to my brothers in male lineage and to teach them this art - if they desire to learn it -without fee and covenant; to give a share of precepts and oral instruction and all the other learning to my sons and to the sons of him who has instructed me and to pupils who have signed the covenant and have taken an oath according to the medical law, but no one else.

    I will apply dietetic measures for the benefit of the sick according to my ability and judgment; I will keep them from harm and injustice.

    I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody who asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect. Similarly I will not give to a woman an abortive remedy. In purity and holiness I will guard my life and my art.

    I will not use the knife, not even on sufferers from stone, but will withdraw in favor of such men as are engaged in this work.

    Whatever houses I may visit, I will come for the benefit of the sick, remaining free of all intentional injustice, of all mischief and in particular of sexual relations with both female and male persons, be they free or slaves.

    What I may see or hear in the course of the treatment or even outside of the treatment in regard to the life of men, which on no account one must spread abroad, I will keep to myself, holding such things shameful to be spoken about.

    If I fulfil this oath and do not violate it, may it be granted to me to enjoy life and art, being honored with fame among all men for all time to come; if I transgress it and swear falsely, may the opposite of all this be my lot.

    Translation from the Greek by Ludwig Edelstein. From The Hippocratic Oath: Text, Translation, and Interpretation, by Ludwig Edelstein. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1943.

    "Today, most graduating medical-school students swear to some form of the oath, usually a modernized version. Indeed, oath-taking in recent decades has risen to near uniformity, with just 24 percent of U.S. medical schools administering the oath in 1928 to nearly 100 percent today.

    Yet paradoxically, even as the modern oath's use has burgeoned, its content has tacked away from the classical oath's basic tenets. According to a 1993 survey of 150 U.S. and Canadian medical schools, for example, only 14 percent of modern oaths prohibit euthanasia, 11 percent hold convenant with a deity, 8 percent foreswear abortion, and a mere 3 percent forbid sexual contact with patients -- all maxims held sacred in the classical version. The original calls for free tuition for medical students and for doctors never to "use the knife" (that is, conduct surgical procedures) -- both obviously out of step with modern-day practice. Perhaps most telling, while the classical oath calls for "the opposite" of pleasure and fame for those who transgress the oath, fewer than half of oaths taken today insist the taker be held accountable for keeping the pledge."

    From: <a href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/doctors/oath_today.html" target="_blank">http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/doctors/oath_today.html</a>
     
  25. Stillfocused

    Stillfocused Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2001
    Messages:
    153
    Likes Received:
    0
    Therefore, a self correction.

    First, Do No Harm" Is Not in the Hippocratic Oath
    It is a widely held misconception that the familiar dictum "First, do no harm" comes from the Hippocratic Oath, the oath many physicans take when they enter medical practice.

    However, the Hippocratic Oath does not and never did contain those words. It expresses a sentiment similar in general meaning, but never employs the words "First, do no harm."

    It is the opinion of many scholars that Hippocrates did, in fact, originate the phrase, but in another of his writings, Epidemics, Bk. I, Sect. XI. One translation reads: "Declare the past, diagnose the present, foretell the future; practice these acts. As to diseases, make a habit of two things?to help, or at least to do no harm."

    "It is true that "First, do no harm" is expressed "Primum non nocere" in Latin, but Hippocrates wrote in his native Greek. The Latin, then, is not the origin of the phrase, and no one seems to know for sure who coined the Latin. It is a translation of the original Greek, perhaps, but some sources attribute "Primum non nocere" to the Roman physician, Galen."

    <a href="http://www.geocities.com/everwild7/noharm.html" target="_blank">http://www.geocities.com/everwild7/noharm.html</a>

    That said, doctors are on the side of life, not death. It is wrong to kill your patients.
     
  26. BamaAlum

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2001
    Messages:
    513
    Likes Received:
    4
    RockandRolldoc,
    I appreciate your comments. I have a question, however. How does the conservative right force their opinions on others anymore than liberals do? I contend that liberals impose their beliefs even more than their conservative counterparts. It is a fact that nearly all popular media is biased towards the left. The entertainment industry is most certainly left wing and they reach millions of homes every second with a left wing agenda. As far as Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson are concerned they are hardly representative of the conservative right. They are fringe characters who only serve as fodder for rabid liberals. Your implication that they are ideologically equivalent to Osama bin Laden is ridiculous. The last time I checked these two had not declared a "Christian jihad" and promoted terrorists activities. I also love your implication that conservatism is only for white, priviledged Christians. I guess that means liberalism is for the poor, huddled, masses. This is the same party line the left has been promoting forever. Yeah, like Al Gore was so in touch with the common people. He spent his entire life in Washington, which is why he got waxed in his "home state" of Tennessee. Our current conservative president has appointed the most diverse cabinet in history. Conservatives are not radical fundamentalists who seek to oppress the people. They are crucial to the checks and balances of our government.
     
  27. RockandRolldoc

    RockandRolldoc Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2002
    Messages:
    376
    Likes Received:
    0
    Bama, don't confuse my status as a free thinking compassionate liberal minded American with being a Democrat. Al Gore did everything he could to lose that election, and I did not vote for him either. I don't like Democrats. I loathe Republicans, but I don't like Democrats. As far as who is forcing who this can be a chicken and egg argument. I will say that it's a lot less harmful to say "you can do x if x doesn't harm another individual" then " you can't do x period". I did not mean to imply that you had to be white and christian to be a conservative... but let's face it conservative ideology is mostly represented in white christian culture. Again... I have nothing against you and your family believing and exercising conservative values... but you cannot impose them on the rest of the country. This is a society that embraces individualism, I have no intention on imposing my beliefs on any individual... I just want to maintain a free environment where everyone can exercise their values--provided of course that they do not infringe on anyone else's rights. John Doe suffering from a debilitating, painful degererative nerve disease and decides on euthanasia in Anytown,USA has no affect on your life. If it does... then you need to get one. I think it's best to end this political discussion, feel free to take the last word, I'm satisfied with my points and my beliefs. Let me close by quoting the closest thing to God that I believe actually exists--Billy Joel.

    " I'd rather laugh with the sinners than cry with the saints. The sinners are much more fun."

    It's been educational...

    Best,

    Michael
     

Share This Page