Posts Made By: Steve Hollenbach

William Paolini said:

As you probably know, Jack Kevorkian died recently. Some believe that an individual's end-of-life decision is a human right and not something that should be against the law.

What do you think? If any of you have been in the position of having to deal with a medical decision for an aging relative, I personally think it is a fine line sometimes as if that relative left no "official" final wishes and if during an operation the doctor asks the family wishes in a difficult situation, to continue with little hope of any quality of life, or to not treat further, one could view that as indeed a "quiet" form of assisted suicide. That is just one example as there can be many shades of grey.

So why shouldn't an individual judged to be of sound mind, have the right to end life on their own terms? I don't really see much of a difference between assisted suicide and placing an elderly in hospice on morphine so they are basically not conscience until they finally pass, which can literally take weeks until they waste away. Or if they give a do-not-resuscitate order, isn't that paramount to suicide since resuscitation could end up saving them for a sizable while?

Howdy,

Here's a little background then I'll weigh in with my opinion.

My Dad lingered on in pain for months with cancer in all his joints, his brain, his colon and well pick an innard, and he had it. They moved him from Hospital to Hospice and doped him up.

The medication (morphine equivelent) had a detrimental affect on his thought process. Then he was half in & out where everything was a blur and very uncomfortable. It was very frightening for him. In his more lucid moments before he died, he asked me to take the pain medication away. He'd rather live in pain that loose his mind. I didn't blame him. I passed this along to Mom who discussed it with doctors who assured her the pain alone could cause a cardiac arrest. At that point they doped him up so much he was unconcious. That should be a crime.

I think we all agree cancer sucks. It and many other old age malodies makes the end of our lives a very difficult challenge.

There is some good news in that little saga. He was three months short of his 84th birthday, and had lived a very good life. After six days in Hospice they reduced the drugs so he could talk. He asked my Mom to hold his hand till he fell asleep and that was it.

OK, the last few minutes were about as good as it gets. The last few months were about as bad as it gets.

My Dad was a strict Catholic and believed he was meant to suffer this fate. Now he's probably rolling his eyes knowing I dissagree. The end of our lives is such a personal thing the government can just butt-out.

That's easy to say for someone 83 years old having lived a long life filled with good works. Dr. Kavorkian must have known the suffering his patients were going through. If stopping my Dad's pain could have been done by some gentle means, I would have. Yet his desires, in accordance with his beliefs, not mine, are what we respected.

I've also seen a sixteen year old girl seriously mangled in a car accident. Her parents didn't believe in doctors and carted her off on a blanket in the back of a pickup truck like a sack of onions. Small town news traveled fast. We found out she didn't make it to her own bed. Internal bleeding that might have been corrected surgically was ignored.

Our government likes simple accross the board rules. Most Prosecuting Attornies just want to rack up as many convictions as they can regardless of the unfortunate lifes of those they consider victims.

Should I become dependent on some drug or machine that keeps my body going when my mind is gone... well both my brothers and I have an agreement.

However, who would judge if we are not of sound mind. We may well be, but simply not be able to communicate. If it seems to be the end of a long life, I'm really OK with it. If it's a teenager who's life could be saved, then call 911 run the blood tests take the X-rays and do whatever it takes.

Losing one's mind if frightening, and becoming a burden to my own family is outside the scope of my work here. So... Thirty years from now, if you hear I set out to sail around the world alone and vanished. Well...you'll know.

Thanks,
Steve
8)

John Agnew said:

Mutually exclusive concepts. Which do you choose?

Depends on what you call omniscient.

If it means an entity seperate from ourselves knows what will happen ahead of time, free will is still possible.

If it means taking some action to intervene based on that knowledge, then that would reduce or even defeat free will.

I know when I give only one toy to my twin nephews an arguement will soon ensue. I may even say; "You have to share." Am I directing them to argue? No, I'm directing them to share.

In this example, the arguement is pretty much their choice. My goal to teach them the concept of sharing might have failed, but they also might learn from the experience. They are left to judge each others' generosity and their own self control.

That would be analogous to the resources of the earth shared by mankind. The only guidance we really have is the long term effects of our actions.

Now if omniscient means we do what was predictable and are punished as a result. It still does not negate free will. The punishment would be an excercise in futility.

If omniscient means every single action we take is predestined, then there is no free will.

That's about it.
Steve
8)

Rob Wiederrich said:

Finally it clears. After an all nighter in the OB...I stayed up to great the sun..here is a morning image of the scope in the sun.

Rob

Nice roll-off Rob,
Is the roof made of fiberglass? Looks translucent.

The scope looks like it's about to leap out of there.

Living in AZ but working in NM has me home for weekends about once a month. Not enough time to do laundry much less finish the observatory.
Steve
8)

Doug Matulis said:

Given the events of the last few weeks and days and the worsening of the US economy and debt exceeding GDP and no real way in the physical world to fix this country, it got me wondering about end time prophecies in the Bible and what America's role will be, so I started to look into those prophecies a little further. My thoughts were that the world's super-power and economical leadership should play a major role in end-time events. What I found is no indication that the most powerful nation on earth, until about 2008 or 2009 anyway, has no role end-time events. How can this be? Answer, America does not exist as a nation during these coming events. I think that is what is happening before our eyes, our country is dying a slow death and will not exist as it once was within the next few years. God has raised leaders that are totally incompetent and/or are purposely destroying the country from within and without in preperation for God's final play of events on earth prior to Christ's second coming. Any thoughts on this?

Hi Doug,
Optimist! Seriously, do you really think we're near the end of the world? I don't. Mankind's reign will end eventually, but life will go on one way or the other. It's hardly worth worrying about.

In any case the United States might suffer from non-leaders, corruption and a host of other political and economic problems, but we've gotten through those challenges before. The next big change may be political. Our political process worked under the assumed altruistic traits of elected officials. However they have shown almost without exception to be self centered and put the health of the country second or third. I'm not quite sure how to solve this problem, but the result is a polarized government that can't accomplish much more than puting a bandaid on a braiin tummor.

I don't beleive God "Smites" anyone or even a nation. Unless of course you count it being built into the fabric of the Universe. If you screw up the result will be bad. If you work hard to solve a problem, depending on how good a job you do, the results will be more positive.

It's all very simple. Study our politicians carefully and vote out the incompenent fools. Praying for guidance or for patience doesn't hurt.

No Doug, I don't think we're at the end, just a bigger speed bump than usual.

Thanks,
Steve
8)

Lee Spain said:

If we want to fix the healthcare insurance crisis, here is one easy step: Shoot all the actuaries. O.K. that's a bit extreme. However, we shouldn't allow insurance companies to group customers or charge customers based on their age. Oh sure, people might whine, "Why should young people subsidize the old?" However, with luck, everyone gets old eventually. People don't generally opt out of getting old. You can't adopt a new habit and not get old. Everyone should be in the same pool together--with perhaps a few behavior-based adjustments. Smokers, Motorcyclists, and Skydivers might pay a bit more. That way the risks are spread across everyone. You shouldn't be totally screwed because you got a disease, your parents got a disease, you have a baby, or you get old. That's ridiculous.

Hi Lee,
I think lots of people focus more on the cost of insurance than on the care they get. If we hope to scratch the surface of this problem, we have to address tort reform. About half the bill for a visit to the doctor goes to insurance protecting him from lawsuits.

Lawsuits have played hell on the aviation industry. A guy takes off in bad weather, gets killed, and the lawyer talks his wife & kids into suing Cessna. That drives the price up.

Same thing in healthcare. The more we file suit against doctors who honestly try to help, the more the cost goes up.

There's my two cents,
Steve
8)

William Paolini said:

In a recent poll (http://www.publicreligion.org/research/?id=654), a majority (56%) of the public said it is important for a presidential candidate to have strong religious beliefs, regardless of whether those beliefs are the same as their own.

I find it interesting that for the American public the response was so close to even. Why do you think most people feel it is important for a president to be religious? And why do you think for so many it is not a factor?

Hi Bill,
The unknown is a typical fear in all of us. So, I'd imagine for 56% of the population, religious belief is a known factor, and they would want a politician to share at least something they ccan relate to as far as personal belief. It would be interesting to see the acceptability of a Hindu or Buhdist candidate.

On the other hand, as mentioned before on this forum, a politician can say anything to get elected. Television does not show how closely they adhere to a given religion until it's too late.

Steve
8)

The original survey question can be found here - http://www.publicreligion.org/objects/uploads/67/July_PRRI-RNS_Topline.pdf

Doug Matulis said:

Just conducting a quick poll on salvation

Please answer the following question with either works of grace:

In biblical Christianity, is salvation by works or is salvation by grace through faith?

[COLOR="Blue"]Hi Doug,
This is more on the non-Biblical side, but I don't believe God grants grace at all. It would be "works" for me.

A state of grace is often referred to as if reaching a goal. That would be like me saying; My project has reached a high level of safety, based on nothing bad happening all year. Sitting here typing, I have no certainty a guy isn't dancing at the edge of the roof just behind me. This implies "I'm done now." Yet there could well be more to do.

To ignor the possibility for further evaluation, improvement and growth, would be to fall short of the dilligence we owe ourselves.

There's my two cents,
Steve
8) [/COLOR]

Hi Bill,
Interesting situation. They hold to a believe in continuing Jewish tradition regardless of beleif in a diety. This places all the importance on rituals rather than the usual alternate of seeking an understanding of what God is. This could be the oposite of my own persuit.

It's an indirect Golden Calf. When rituals are the only part of religion to hold dear, then in a way, they replaced God. Rather than fashoning an idle to worship (as a diety), they hold to a shell or remnant.

Sort of like stopping at a stop sign, watching the traffic go by and never moving again.
Well, at least they value doing good works. That in itself is a sign they are pursuing something outside themselves.

Very odd story.
Thanks,
Steve
8)

William Paolini said:

Judaism without God? Seriously? Sounds like the sin of the Golden Calf (egel maseikhah) all over again



http://www.religionnews.com/index.php?/rnstext/atheist_jews_craft_a_judaism_without_god/

Dave Snope said:

Should be Omar Hammami, military commander of Al-Qaeda affiliated Al Shabaab in Somalia.


At least 70 people have been killed by a huge suicide blast near a government compound in the Somali capital, Mogadishu, say officials.

A spokesman for the Islamist militant group al-Shabab told the BBC it had carried out the attack.

One aid worker said the force of the blast had thrown body parts hundreds of metres away.

Among those killed were soldiers guarding the offices and students who had been queuing for exam results at the education ministry, hoping to gain a scholarship to study in Turkey.

Ali Abdullahi, a nurse at Medina hospital in the city, said victims were being brought in with horrific wounds, including burns and lost limbs. Some had been blinded, he said.

"It is the most awful tragedy I have ever seen," he told AP.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-15166107


Lest we forget, amid all the debate about due process, that these guys WANT TO BE KILLED. And they want to kill U.S. citizens, topple our government, and they want to kill Jews wherever they lie. Here are Hammami's own words:

Send me a cruise like Maa'lam Adam al Ansari
And send me a couple of tons like Zarqawi
And send me a drone like Abu Laith al Libi
And Special Forces like Saleh Ali Nabhani

Send me all four and send me much much more
I pray for that on my way to heavens door
Send me four and send me more, that what I implore
An amazing martyrdom I strive for and adore


Hammami is a US citizen (from Alabama) who converted to Islam and then traveled to Somalia in 2006. Once in Somalia, he quickly rose through the ranks, and now serves as a military commander. He is one of the many foreign commanders who hold senior leadership positions in Shabaab, which is al Qaeda's affiliate in East Africa. Hammami is one of 14 people indicted by the US Justice Department in August 2010 for providing material support to Shabaab.

Read more: http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2011/04/american_shabaab_com.php#ixzz1ZvwmnnmH

So, should we wait for his arrest and trial in Alabama, while watching more innocent children slaughtered and maimed for the crime of trying to get an education? Or should we hit him with a smart bomb as soon as we can? (Hint: we've already tried to kill him with drones).

Hi Dave,
Don't rag on Due Process of Law too much; it can work.

As Explained in another thread, he gets due process; nothing new there. He's in Somalia (or where ever). His crimes were committed there, and therefore not our problem. He's breaking Somali law and... US Citizen or not is subject to anything at all they want to do to him. If I rob a bank in Singapore, I'm subject to their law not ours. That's old hat.

OK, if he sets foot in the USA we grab him coming in for what crimes we want him for.

However the right-wing here wants to go on a crusade and be the cops for the whole world. As a Militant Moderate I don't advise it, but you want to carry the fight to these clowns. In that case we still have a Due Process. We go out to capture or arrest him as a fugitive from justice in the USA and possibly many other countries under established International Law. Oh yes, he's likely to resist... well duhh... So go prepared, and keep the news team out of harms way. It's just that simple.

On the other hand... If the Somali government requests Military assistance in fighting an enemy, there's where you're off the hook. They then have formed an alliance with the USA.

If a US Citizen joins forces with a foreign power, principality or potentate known to be engaged in combatant operations against the US or our allies, be it government or factional, International and US Law provide for that person being treated no differently than the armed forces of that power. This is nothing new... Last time I read up on it was in 1981 I think. In other words, you got'm.

Legality and Due Process of Law can still be maintained if we do the homework first.
It just took me about six minutes. How long does it take to redirect a Preditor?

Due Process is not something we owe the bad guys, it's something we owe everybody.
Good Hunting...

Thanks,
Steve
8)

Doug Matulis said:

Why

Hi Doug,
I think Mark covered the technical aspects pretty well. My problem isn't with vanishing threads, it's with missing buttons. Especially on my old Hawaiian shirt.

I haven't visited this Forum in weeks; mostly due to the same rehash of the same topics. It's worse on the Political Forum.

I like to discuss religion and politics, but there are limits to how often a topic can be repeated before it's ignored entirely.

Obviously Astromart is following there own rules for removing threads. Even so we can simply ignor the less flattering ones and refrain from writing anything that obviously raises lots of eyebrows.

We've both done a bit of that.
have a good one!
Steve
8)