PDA

View Full Version : Big question while converting the wife




xcalybur
06-19-2007, 06:53 PM
I was talking to my wife about Ron Paul and she had a couple questions about him. She asked about abortion and gay rights and I told her what his position was on it. Then she hit me with a question that I don't know what Ron Pauls stance is.

She wants to know what Ron Paul believes about euthanasia?

I honestly haven't seen any mention of it at all.

Thanks.

Harald
06-19-2007, 06:56 PM
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig/paul3.html

Euthanasia

Your generation will deal with euthanasia as we have dealt with abortion. I predict a major and heated debate will occur in the next 30 years. Already one state has legalized "doctor-assisted suicides." I’m not talking about reasoned restraints of heroic measures for the terminally ill at the patient’s request. Euthanasia laws as they have progressed in some European nations permit active euthanasia.

We already have the Dr. Kevorkians and angels of death leading the charge in a dangerous and illegal fashion in this country. It’s interesting that the promoters of euthanasia always want the doctors involved. This is for a precise purpose, and that is to gain moral sanction not otherwise available. You never hear about having attorney or judge-assisted suicides, but they can figure out the details as well as the medical profession.

This trend is fraught with great danger. Once physicians embark on making decisions over death, rather than always opting for life, they invite too many mistakes. Subjugation to social pressure and family squabbles can affect decisions. The government now assumes nearly a complete role in regulating and paying for health care; economic factors will surely play a role in this decision-making as time goes on. Already we have seen managed care and government regulations dictate rules that are not always fair as to who gets the organ transplant or some other expensive treatment.

Regardless of the law in dealing with these issues, I see no reason why the medical profession has to grant moral approval to the process. Let someone else deal with it and carry out the deed. It’s surely not an issue of know-how, and we need not give it credibility by pretending it’s part of our responsibility to heal. Society needs and demands our endorsement to make it a medical procedure, which it is not. Our endorsement only prevents others from considering the morality of the issue.

Already a well-known former governor is strongly advocating active euthanasia, saying "the elderly have an obligation to die" and should not hang on to life that offers little.

The US Congress, although technically it has no jurisdiction to do so, has tried to undermine the Oregon law (the first state to pass a law that permits physician-assisted suicide) with proposed legislation that would severely micromanage the care of dying patients. This attempt to do what some see as "the right thing to do" will only cause more problems by intimidating physicians in their efforts to relieve the pain of dying patients. New restraints by government on prescribing for the dying will prove to be an unnecessary aggravation. This is not the answer to a society moving toward euthanasia.

This subject will be with us for a long while. Your generation of physicians will have no choice but to deal with it one way or another. You can’t escape it – even total non-participation in the debate is taking a position.

Obviously, problems do exist in medicine, but the profession you have chosen is the best of all. It is a noble calling to enter medicine. You have learned the science, you will get your license, and the only task left before you is to become a caring physician. I am sure that nearly every one of you thought of service to your fellow man when deciding on a medical career. And that’s a noble ambition that should never be forgotten.

The true physician draws on this and must be reminded of it throughout his or her life. This is what makes us approach our patients with kindness, gentleness, caring, and concern. Being a good listener is essential. Someday, a sincere thank you or a small gift will remind you of this, and at times it will even surpass in value the fee that you have received for your services.

Good intentions can kill any patient, just as they did George Washington. Good science, without compassion and understanding,will not allow you to practice great medicine. Compassion and care and good science will make you become the physician you dreamed of being. This will require tolerance for alternative medical options – since some may actually work – and a recognition that faith and prayer have a healing quality. Intolerance of this view will not enhance a physician’s ability to heal.

Chad
06-19-2007, 06:57 PM
so as not to spread incorrect info, post edited

singapore_sling
06-19-2007, 10:45 PM
Im going to assume he thinks the states should decide.

jd603
06-19-2007, 10:56 PM
He is pro-life personally but doesn't believe in the federal government creating a nation-wide law preventing it, the states should decide.

He is for individual rights and doesn't have a problem with "don't ask don't tell" etc. He doesn't believe gay or straight mis-behavior in the military should be tolerated. I guess he feels people shouldn't be openly-anything in the military...

DrKevorkian
06-19-2007, 11:08 PM
My user name aside, (its a habitual name that started as an inside joke, not some unusual reverence) leaving it to the states sounds like a good policy, and sounds like something ron would back.

Man from La Mancha
06-19-2007, 11:27 PM
Whenever I have question about what Dr. Paul believes I just google that question and low and behold Ron has talked about it.