 | Back to forum list |
| Back to The Lounge |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The NHS doesnt extend to the Channel Islands so youll have to pay. At least if they botch the job youll get a refund. When I lived there you would easily get home calls from the doctor too." If you can afford to live in Jersey for the mandatory 12 months before applying for assisted dying, you can probably afford to pay the fee for the service. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The NHS doesnt extend to the Channel Islands so youll have to pay. At least if they botch the job youll get a refund. When I lived there you would easily get home calls from the doctor too." Imagine surviving a bodged euthanasia  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The NHS doesnt extend to the Channel Islands so youll have to pay. At least if they botch the job youll get a refund. When I lived there you would easily get home calls from the doctor too. Imagine surviving a bodged euthanasia "..and yet people do survive budged execution by lethal injection in the USA. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We all die after our last meal"  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Some on death tow have survived botched attempts" Took a while for Ted Bundy to go. They forgot to put enough conductive gel on his head. Bit of a firework display apparently. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Esther Rantzen is said to be livid the uk lords have filled the uk version of the bill with so much filibuster that we will not get it delivered in this parliament. A win of sorts for the pro lifers ,as there will be little chance the mp’s bill it is , will be around to push it to the fore next time ." House of Lords, Gods waiting room, collecting a nice princely sum for doing little to show for it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We all die after our last meal" I didn’t die after my last meal But I am shittin through the eye of a needle | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"… passing a law to allow assisted dieing…" I’m passing a law to allow assisted spelling This WILL be compulsory. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And im not making light of a very serious subject. But if you have an opinion on a very serious subject at least know how to spell it for FS!" Couldn't agree more. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Esther Rantzen is said to be livid the uk lords have filled the uk version of the bill with so much filibuster that we will not get it delivered in this parliament." That's life | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Esther Rantzen is said to be livid the uk lords have filled the uk version of the bill with so much filibuster that we will not get it delivered in this parliament. That's life" Superb! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Esther Rantzen is said to be livid the uk lords have filled the uk version of the bill with so much filibuster that we will not get it delivered in this parliament. That's life… " “And now, as we increase the morphine and Ethel’s life slowly ebbs away… our Cyril will read out a humorous story whilst holding a potato shaped like a double-ender…” | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Esther Rantzen is said to be livid the uk lords have filled the uk version of the bill with so much filibuster that we will not get it delivered in this parliament. That's life… “And now, as we increase the morphine and Ethel’s life slowly ebbs away… our Cyril will read out a humorous story whilst holding a potato shaped like a double-ender…”" Whilst dressed in Ethel's Sunday best   xx | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Esther Rantzen is said to be livid the uk lords have filled the uk version of the bill with so much filibuster that we will not get it delivered in this parliament. A win of sorts for the pro lifers ,as there will be little chance the mp’s bill it is , will be around to push it to the fore next time ." It's not a fillibuster, they're actually debating it, as they should. It's a terrible bill promoted in exchange for a bauble of some kind | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Esther Rantzen is said to be livid the uk lords have filled the uk version of the bill with so much filibuster that we will not get it delivered in this parliament. That's life… “And now, as we increase the morphine and Ethel’s life slowly ebbs away… our Cyril will read out a humorous story whilst holding a potato shaped like a double-ender…”" I bet that dog who could say "Sausages" ended up being put down when his time was up. Et lux perpetua luceat eis🙏🏼 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Esther Rantzen is said to be livid the uk lords have filled the uk version of the bill with so much filibuster that we will not get it delivered in this parliament. That's life… “And now, as we increase the morphine and Ethel’s life slowly ebbs away… our Cyril will read out a humorous story whilst holding a potato shaped like a double-ender…” I bet that dog who could say "Sausages" ended up being put down when his time was up. Et lux perpetua luceat eis🙏🏼 " Et aeternum farcimen luceat Cyrillo… | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Esther Rantzen is said to be livid the uk lords have filled the uk version of the bill with so much filibuster that we will not get it delivered in this parliament. That's life… “And now, as we increase the morphine and Ethel’s life slowly ebbs away… our Cyril will read out a humorous story whilst holding a potato shaped like a double-ender…” I bet that dog who could say "Sausages" ended up being put down when his time was up. Et lux perpetua luceat eis🙏🏼 Et aeternum farcimen luceat Cyrillo… " Amen 🌠 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Jersey is passing a law to allow assisted dieing. Will it bd compulsory be day?" Are you actually a grown up? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It will still require Royal Assent in Jersey before it becomes law. They passed it in the Isle of Man 11 months ago and it still hasn’t received Royal Assent" Which raises the important constitutional question:- How can the King, with the full title:- 'Charles the Third, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of His other Realms and Territories King, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith', give his assent to legislation that is totally contrary to one of the Ten Commandments? Viz:- 'Thou shalt not kill'! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Jersey is passing a law to allow assisted dieing. Will it bd compulsory be day?" Eh? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It will still require Royal Assent in Jersey before it becomes law. They passed it in the Isle of Man 11 months ago and it still hasn’t received Royal Assent Which raises the important constitutional question:- How can the King, with the full title:- 'Charles the Third, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of His other Realms and Territories King, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith', give his assent to legislation that is totally contrary to one of the Ten Commandments? Viz:- 'Thou shalt not kill'!" Fortunately, we are not governed by the 10 commandments, or any other religious nonsense. If we were we would still be sl@ve owners who could stone their wives to death. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It will still require Royal Assent in Jersey before it becomes law. They passed it in the Isle of Man 11 months ago and it still hasn’t received Royal Assent Which raises the important constitutional question:- How can the King, with the full title:- 'Charles the Third, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of His other Realms and Territories King, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith', give his assent to legislation that is totally contrary to one of the Ten Commandments? Viz:- 'Thou shalt not kill'!" To answer my own question,a bit of research reveals that the King is stuck between a rock and a hard place with assisted dying. If he follow his conscience as Defender of the Faith and upholds the Decalogue with "Thou shalt not kill", he would have to refuse giving the Royal Assent, triggering a crisis and possibly his abdication. It's a lose-lose situation:- defend their faith or keep their crown. In the UK, Royal Assent is a formality, but refusing it would be unprecedented in modern times. The King's role is constrained in a secular state prioritising political consensus over religious doctrine. He's caught between ignoring their oath or losing his crown! As regards Parliamentary progress, The Assisted Dying Bill was passed by the Commons in June 2025 and is now with the Lords, where 69% of peers who spoke at the Second Reading opposed it. As it's a Private Members' Bill, it must be approved by the end of the current parliamentary session, which is in May 2026. Given the strong opposition, it's likely the Lords will delay or block the bill. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
I don t get it tbh, its a known fact that people living longer, whatever form that life is taking, is creating an over population situation. I placed a DNR on my med docs years ago to aid the over population situation lolol. Assisted death is by choice of the individual or their kind and, though, there maybe those out there that may try n bump granny off before her time, I m sure that number of such people will be very small and protocols in place to stop them. I can t comprehend the cruelty of keeping someone alive when all that lives is pain or a vacant shell of working parts. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's a well known fact that 100% of people who drink water die....." As do 100% of the people that breathe air, so if you do both, you’re in real trouble. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It will still require Royal Assent in Jersey before it becomes law. They passed it in the Isle of Man 11 months ago and it still hasn’t received Royal Assent Which raises the important constitutional question:- How can the King, with the full title:- 'Charles the Third, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of His other Realms and Territories King, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith', give his assent to legislation that is totally contrary to one of the Ten Commandments? Viz:- 'Thou shalt not kill'!" Considering that the bible prohibits ‘men lying with men as they would with women’, but that has been legalised by the ‘defender of the faith’ giving assent, then it shouldn’t be a problem for assisted dying to get past that step also. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It will still require Royal Assent in Jersey before it becomes law. They passed it in the Isle of Man 11 months ago and it still hasn’t received Royal Assent Which raises the important constitutional question:- How can the King, with the full title:- 'Charles the Third, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of His other Realms and Territories King, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith', give his assent to legislation that is totally contrary to one of the Ten Commandments? Viz:- 'Thou shalt not kill'! Considering that the bible prohibits ‘men lying with men as they would with women’, but that has been legalised by the ‘defender of the faith’ giving assent, then it shouldn’t be a problem for assisted dying to get past that step also." A fair point taken, although the comparison to the 1967 Act is arguably distinct. Decriminalising homosexuality concerned private, consensual acts, whereas assisted dying involves the ending of life, raising distinct moral questions. The Decalogue explicitly prohibits murder, making assisted dying a more direct conflict with Christian doctrine. Moreover, this debate is hypothetical at this juncture, as the bill faces significant opposition in the Upper House, with 67% of Peers opposed. It would therefore seem unlikely to proceed given the current parliamentary session ends in May 2026. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It will still require Royal Assent in Jersey before it becomes law. They passed it in the Isle of Man 11 months ago and it still hasn’t received Royal Assent Which raises the important constitutional question:- How can the King, with the full title:- 'Charles the Third, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of His other Realms and Territories King, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith', give his assent to legislation that is totally contrary to one of the Ten Commandments? Viz:- 'Thou shalt not kill'! Considering that the bible prohibits ‘men lying with men as they would with women’, but that has been legalised by the ‘defender of the faith’ giving assent, then it shouldn’t be a problem for assisted dying to get past that step also. A fair point taken, although the comparison to the 1967 Act is arguably distinct. Decriminalising homosexuality concerned private, consensual acts, whereas assisted dying involves the ending of life, raising distinct moral questions. The Decalogue explicitly prohibits murder, making assisted dying a more direct conflict with Christian doctrine. Moreover, this debate is hypothetical at this juncture, as the bill faces significant opposition in the Upper House, with 67% of Peers opposed. It would therefore seem unlikely to proceed given the current parliamentary session ends in May 2026." "The Decalogue explicitly prohibits murder, making assisted dying a more direct conflict with JEWISH doctrine." Fixed it for you. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"A friend opted for assisted suicide. An inoperable brain tumour. A panel of doctors had to agree. She was able to say goodbye to her loved ones. Everything was put in place. She had to press the button herself. She died with dignity and didn't have to face the pain and horror of a long lingering death. She lived in the Netherlands where it is legal. Why can't we have it here. My dog is 13 and a half years old and is starting to fail. When I see living is getting too much for him I'll take him to the vets. One last act of love for the companionship he gave me " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It will still require Royal Assent in Jersey before it becomes law. They passed it in the Isle of Man 11 months ago and it still hasn’t received Royal Assent Which raises the important constitutional question:- How can the King, with the full title:- 'Charles the Third, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of His other Realms and Territories King, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith', give his assent to legislation that is totally contrary to one of the Ten Commandments? Viz:- 'Thou shalt not kill'! Considering that the bible prohibits ‘men lying with men as they would with women’, but that has been legalised by the ‘defender of the faith’ giving assent, then it shouldn’t be a problem for assisted dying to get past that step also. A fair point taken, although the comparison to the 1967 Act is arguably distinct. Decriminalising homosexuality concerned private, consensual acts, whereas assisted dying involves the ending of life, raising distinct moral questions. The Decalogue explicitly prohibits murder, making assisted dying a more direct conflict with Christian doctrine. Moreover, this debate is hypothetical at this juncture, as the bill faces significant opposition in the Upper House, with 67% of Peers opposed. It would therefore seem unlikely to proceed given the current parliamentary session ends in May 2026. "The Decalogue explicitly prohibits murder, making assisted dying a more direct conflict with JEWISH doctrine." Fixed it for you. " The original reference to Christian doctrine stands as the context was in reference to matter of UK parliamentary debate, where Christian ethics have historically influenced law. The Decalogue's relevance to assisted dying applies across faiths but was perfectly appropriate in this context. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"How anyone can tell you that you haven’t got the right to end your own life if you get a serious illness and can’t look after yourself is beyond me " We do have the moral right, although of course it's currently illegal in the UK and contrary to some religious teachings. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"In theory, assisted dying sounds compassionate and reasonable. But I can’t help wondering if it’s the thin end of the wedge. Over time, could the criteria slowly expand? And even if there’s no direct pressure, might some people start to feel like a burden to their families or society and choose it for that reason? That’s the bit that makes me uneasy." I share your concerns about assisted dying - it's a highly complex issue with many facets to be considered. The risk of criteria expanding or people feeling pressured is real. Crafting and fine-tuning legislation that balances compassion with robust safeguards is a huge challenge which is likely to take some tim to refine before it can enter the statute books. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"In theory, assisted dying sounds compassionate and reasonable. But I can’t help wondering if it’s the thin end of the wedge. Over time, could the criteria slowly expand? And even if there’s no direct pressure, might some people start to feel like a burden to their families or society and choose it for that reason? That’s the bit that makes me uneasy." That's why it won't be a single person's decision, with both legal and medical opinion involved as well. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"In theory, assisted dying sounds compassionate and reasonable. But I can’t help wondering if it’s the thin end of the wedge. Over time, could the criteria slowly expand? And even if there’s no direct pressure, might some people start to feel like a burden to their families or society and choose it for that reason? That’s the bit that makes me uneasy. That's why it won't be a single person's decision, with both legal and medical opinion involved as well." Indeed, the law and medical ethics must protect everyone, especially vulnerable people, and ensure the decision is not taken lightly. Multiple parties must be involved to prevent abuse and ensure it's truly voluntary. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It will still require Royal Assent in Jersey before it becomes law. They passed it in the Isle of Man 11 months ago and it still hasn’t received Royal Assent Which raises the important constitutional question:- How can the King, with the full title:- 'Charles the Third, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of His other Realms and Territories King, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith', give his assent to legislation that is totally contrary to one of the Ten Commandments? Viz:- 'Thou shalt not kill'! Considering that the bible prohibits ‘men lying with men as they would with women’, but that has been legalised by the ‘defender of the faith’ giving assent, then it shouldn’t be a problem for assisted dying to get past that step also. A fair point taken, although the comparison to the 1967 Act is arguably distinct. Decriminalising homosexuality concerned private, consensual acts, whereas assisted dying involves the ending of life, raising distinct moral questions. The Decalogue explicitly prohibits murder, making assisted dying a more direct conflict with Christian doctrine. Moreover, this debate is hypothetical at this juncture, as the bill faces significant opposition in the Upper House, with 67% of Peers opposed. It would therefore seem unlikely to proceed given the current parliamentary session ends in May 2026. "The Decalogue explicitly prohibits murder, making assisted dying a more direct conflict with JEWISH doctrine." Fixed it for you. The original reference to Christian doctrine stands as the context was in reference to matter of UK parliamentary debate, where Christian ethics have historically influenced law. The Decalogue's relevance to assisted dying applies across faiths but was perfectly appropriate in this context. " I do feel a bit sorry for the Jewish faith, they were getting along (not terribly well) until Paul came along and jumped all over them. To the point where Christians take ownership of a Jewish script. If we can revoke the instruction that men shall not lie with men, why not let people take their own lives? Who are we (Christians) to challenge the word of god?! Moreover, who are we to pick and choose which bits of god's words to follow and to ignore? It's going to funny to rock up in hell one day and find that it's populated with bi and gay Christians. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"First we get used to the terminally choosing when to die. How soon before it becomes an expectation to make that choice or in the range of options on diagnosis? Then extended to the elderly, the severely disabled , depressed …." Why will there be "creep"? The UK abolished the capital punishment for murder back in 1965, it hasn't come back. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think it should be legal " Agreed, people when faced with the end of life should choose when it's time | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
