regretful. appalling. gobsmacked. Mr Gosling may be bold and even make money from this wicked story, but the truth is that mercy killing or whatever just because one is ill should not be supported because it is no solution.
His argument becomes even flawed when we look around today and see that many survived the initial HIV epidemic and are still living today; healthy and happy over 20 years after they were all told the same damning thing: ‘we cant save you’, ‘you have 3months to live’, etc.
If he had not killed his partner, may be he could have been among the ones living today and enjoying his life… what a foolish shortsighted person and still he is glorifying himself in it.
If Ray Gosling has any conscience, then he would admit he was wrong to think his late partner may never live. He should be investigated and duly prosecuted. It is in those dire painful situation that our loved ones need our strength more to help them through. To tell them it will be fine and to be consoled by seeing us try our best to uphole their pain while acknowledging we cant imagine the weight of that pain.
This alone deflates the whole argument about mercy killing and all such murder.
I am 67 and I cared for my partner of 43 years in the last week or so of his life when he was dying of cancer.There were many problems but he had no pain because his opiates were at the proper dose.I never for one moment thought of doing this and it would have been against my partner’s wishes.
I think that Gosling should have kept his kept shut about this.To talk in this way now looks like a tawdry publicity stunt for a dead career and a way to make some money – Gosling never had any!
Shut up Ray,you’re helping nobody least of all yourself.
Before coming out I worked as a Methodist pastor for 25 years. I can tell you that opening the door to assisted suicide in my opinion is not a good thing. I have seen too many persons in situations where partners, spouses, friends, or family members had less than pure motives for wanting them dead and now. Modern medicine can insure that people do not have to be in pain during the process of illness and death. There will never be anything pretty about illness and death, but they are a part of living. We must learn to be humane without stepping over a line that may look noble, but in fact is the opposite. Also, could we trust doctors or nurses to do all in their power to preserve life if we thought they might be in colusions with loved ones to end our life?
Can nobody here feel any compassion for Ray? How on earth do you know this man had “impure motives” when killing a partner? I’m not speaking from experience here, but I don’t think killing your partner is a decision you take on lightly.
I have respect for Ray and his partner’s decision.
If the pain was too much and there was no way out, I’d rather go in peace, than suffer relentlessly for weeks or even months.
The guy is stupid: soon he will go to prison after his admission of murder. Who cares how he felt about dead lover? Only the same sort of criminals.
“Only the same sort of criminals…”
Not sure what you mean with that last line.
Any clarification, please…?
I hope it is not what I think it is; I hope I am mistaken in my assumptions; hope I have got hold of the wrong end of the stick.
Spike, I get where you are coming from and believe it or not, I do understand what Ray did. You are right that I don’t know him and have no way to judge his motives. For all I know, he did this because he believed it to be the most caring thing he could do for his partner. The question for me trually is: where do you draw the line? People get control of other people’s power of medical attorney all the time when they are weak and ill and use it for all kinds of reasons besides caring about the person. I’m just saying that my experience tells me that far more people will suffering from pre-mature death than the opposite if we open our laws up to this. But that is just my opinion.
This isn’t going to end well for Mr. Gosling. He has admitted murder.
I have to say if I was dying of cancer or AIDs I would want to choose when I ended my life not the illness.
I agree this guy is very very foolish to talk about this on-camera. Regardless of the rights & wrongs of assisted suicide, in either case it is not something that should be made public in this way.
Having said that, it does say the doctor’s said there was nothing more they could do for his partner, so it sounds from that, that death in that hospital bed was inevitable. I also did find myself agreeing with Sir Terry Pratchet in his Dimbleby Lecture that was televised a couple of weeks ago. When my time comes to die, I would want to die with dignity, but as we all know, its a minefield of a problem.
Does no-ones heart go out to this man? He said it was a long time ago, when HIV/AIDS was more of a life sentance, and that the medical profession could do no more for him. Just try and put yourself into this man’s shoes and how would you feel if the person you loved was laying in a hospital bed dying, in pain, in front of you?
As for whether he should be talking about it now is a different matter – if it is to lead to a more open and honest discussion about assisted suicide then kudos to him for being honest.
I think Spike actually proves my point on this subject, which I believe to be a dangerous one.
We seem to be constantly being told that 73% of people support such drastic action, yet how many of those ask were actually terminally ill? My guess is very few.
It is easy to say you want to be put down when your healthy. I used to support this but I have changed my mind over the years. Mainly because my own mortality raised. Pain can be managed properly and I for one want to live as long as I possibly can.
I can’t seem to get past this argument “oh they were in so much pain “I” just can’t watch. It kinda translates to me “I couldn’t cope seeing it, they were becoming a burden, they are better off died.”
I admit I can get round the Swiss clinic and feel in this country if people truly want to die they will find the money and go. People, when determined, will find for things they really want. If they want to end their Own lives then they are free to do so. I do not feel that assisted suicide here should be legal. It will lead to abuse. No matter how much you convince it won’t, deep down we all know it will. I used to work in a nursing home and telesales for hearing aids before that and the treatment of the elderly by their own families were just disgusting.
When I go through pain most days, I have on the spur of the moment made comments about just dying, but it’s out of frustration. Will that be enough to say ‘oh well he said it so therefore…’?
Life is such a gift, No person can say they truly love someone and then killed them and say it was out of love. It’s more “I can’t be bothered with you, just die, your a burden.”
Most cancer doctors I know, 1 that has been so for over 40 year, have said none of their patients have requested such. Many people do change their minds even towards the end. Will that right be taken away once it has been said? I think so.
This man had no right to take a live and however you look at it, it was cold-blooded murder and he should be charged as such.
George:- a very dear friend of mine had cancer and was told exactly the same thing. They gave him 2 weeks to live. That was 10 years ago and last year he celebrated his 40th birthday. The treatment completely turned everything around and the cancer went. Would it have been right for him to have taken his life. This mate was again a big part of why my mind was changed then the reasons as stated above.
Surely when we start giving a reason for people to kill themselves we give up on any hope for others.
intelligent people can say what they like here on this subject , for me life is a precious flower which should not be throwaway until its complexly dead. How can one take a life they did not give and call that love? Lord have Marcy
This was NOT a case of assisted suicide, however. Taking a pillow and suffocating someone to death (which is what Gosling did) is not suicide. Gosling ended his partner’s life.
In theory I am in favour of assisted suicide when the diagnosis is terminal and imminent.
In the absence of laws which clearly lay out what is legal or illegal then I would certainly think that the person dying actually do the deed themselves.
If Gosling’s partner had said ‘I want to go’, then Gosling could have assisted him by leaving him access to too much medecine so he could overdose.
I think the fact that he suffocated him is taking the idea of assisted ‘suicide’ too far. That was no suicide. It was manslaughter.
The response to this story surprises me greatly. This is not someone who killed someone against their will, this is someone who came to an agreement with a lover who came down with one of the most debilitating viruses we can get. Put yourself in his situation: You are watching your lover waste away, slowly and painfully, and they ask you to put a stop to it if recovery becomes impossible. What would you do?
Show some compassion, and don’t be so quick to pass judgement, because you may well find yourself in either position some day.
Hospitals and doctors regularly kill people who have terminal illnesses with high doses of opiates, mostly without the patients or families knowledge.
What Ray Gosling did was out of love I refuse to judge him for that.
“Put yourself in his situation: You are watching your lover waste away, slowly and painfully, and they ask you to put a stop to it if recovery becomes impossible. What would you do?”
I’d do a little research on the painkillers and medication he was taking and leave them out for him to self medicate. And I’d help him if he asked.
I wouldn’t take a pillow and place it over his face until he was dead.
Assisted suicide needs to be regulated as it happens so often.
Assisted death is not the same thing as assisted suicide.
Simon, your last comment leads me to think that you don’t much about the story (not that I know much more).
Gosling has clearly stated that the docs could not do anything more to alleviate the guy’s pain. He also did it with the tacit consent of said doc who probably knew what the situation was.
I don’t know why Gosling is saying this now – perhaps he has been prompted to unburden himself publicly by the current media preoccupation with these issues. A prosecution could be problematic because it is an essentially uncorroborated confession over an event of long ago.
This was clearly killing and not assisted suicide, if Gosling’s account is accurate, and should not be permitted by the law. But people in Gosling’s position must be shown more compassion than evinced by some of the posters here. Having recently watched an elderly relative decline into dementia and physical incapacity before a long-protracted death whose carer was himself elderly and unwell I feel I have gained insight into what people in these situations may feel driven to. Recent cases in the news have been more about assisted suicide than what Gosling says he did, however, and I can see the dangers inherent in any liberalisation of the law. Because of this I feel that the threat of legal sanction should remain, but that every case should be assessed by the CPS and the courts on its merits. They have generally shown themselves able to exercise compassion as well as justice.
Yes and he chose to ‘assist’ his lover by placing a pillow on his face and pressing until he was no more. No silly games like allowing his lover to take pills or medication (which if he chose to do that, then the could still have changed his mind).
Gosling’s was a pretty active assistance. In fact it could be interpreted as being manlaughter, as the ending of his lover’s life was no infact self-inflicted. Ray Gosling made the decision and did the activity that resulted in his partner’s death.
I believe that regulation for assisted suicide is much needed in Britain and I expect that eventually it will be.
But I can guarantee with almost 100% certainly that suffocating someone to death with a pillow over their face will never qualify as an accepted or legal way of euthanasia.
I have just lost a great friend and ex-Partner through Cancer. I have cared for her every day for the last two years. I watched her go from a strong, happy and proud woman to a quivering shell of humanity who in the end, only wanted a release from the agonising and excruciating pain which enveloped her. Opiates are NOT always enough, nor steroids, palliative radio-therapy or any of the other medicines given. The pain some experience is far greater than some others experience. To say that pain control is adequate for people is ridiculous and without foundation. To cite the good fortune of one person who lives longer than was forecast says nothing other than he was lucky. My friend was given less than a year, she died in six months. Only and until some of you nay sayers have sat up into the early hours, for days on end, holding the hand of someone in absolute agony, knowing that there is nothing you can do, listening to that person begging for relief, begging for an end, then and only then can you criticise others about it. This man did what he thought was right for his Love and if I’d been half the person he was, I would have done the same for my friend. I will have a deep and life long regret that I didn’t help her. I had the drugs to hand, which would have stopped the pain through overdose, if this man’s Partner was in a hospital then he would not have had access to them. So what else do you do? You use whatever is to hand.
To uphold the teachings of religion about a god who is just and loving and merciful yet allows such horrendous deeds to be done in that gods name is nonsensical. Especially on this forum, in light of the malignant people who populate the religious ranks in this world, calling either for our deaths or for us to be corralled in some manner and not allowed into civilised society. Even now, their are followers of christianity who demonise the death of Alexander McQueen. Not even buried yet but he is attacked none the less. As for some who say that helping their loved one towards the end is merely saying “be off with you, I can’t be bothered anymore.” wait until you’re in the same situation before you go shooting from the hip. You’ll find then that the trite and easy answers don’t come as easy as they used to. Don’t be so quick to judge others in a situation you’ve probably never been in.
And as sure as night follows day, you don’t ever want to find yourself in that situation, I can promise you that.
I understand what your saying AngieRS but before you carry on lecturing the ‘wait until your in the same situation’ again, I have been in the same situation, I know what it’s like but I had to deal with ‘please don’t let them take me’, the other side. Death is never easy and seeing someone you love dying is the hardest thing to do. Being with someone who despite everything hung on til everyone had said goodbye before departing. That determination to carry on as long as possible, to see all and utter those words.
No, it was extremely hard but my God seeing that fight for life does change you.
I guess we are all different but people do change their minds and changing the law may take that right away, esp if it means saving money and not being a burden.
I am appalled at some of the grossly intolerant views expressed about this tragic case.
How dare anyone, notably that ghastly superstitious bigot in the Vatican, try to tell me when to end my life. It is my life and my choice.
I am a member of Dignity in Dying (www.dignityindying.org.uk)which campaigns for the legalisation of assisted suicide, and I have made an advance decision (formerly a living will)to make sure that my wishes about medical treatment are observed. This is provided for by the Mental Capacity Act 2007 and I suggest that all rational-minded readers of this report do likewise.
“I am appalled at some of the grossly intolerant views expressed about this tragic case.”
Erm I’m sorry I thought the idea of debate was to hear all sides of the, very important, argument. Not to just agree with all that someone adds at some stage and if they don’t agree then they are “grossly intolerant”.
And not sure why you brought the Pope into it either don’t remember him being in this story.
If someone doesn’t agree with you are they are entitled to that. Not to be dismissed, if so I don’t agree with you and if your fighting for the legalisation of assisted suicide then help us all as I am even more worried. With you in charge we can rub out any rights of the living.
Surely your choice to your living will is rightly just that. I personally don’t agree with it but thats life.
“When you love someone, it is difficult to see them suffer.”
Veteran broadcaster Ray Gosling
No it’s not but it doesn’t give you the right to smother them to death!!
No it’s not easy but… that should have been
“Lord have Marcy”
Ironically, from your comment, Davis Mac-Iyalla, you seem to be void of any at all.
AngieRS, thats a very touching and very tragic story. I find myself wondering how I could live through that watching my partner die slowly, and its almost too frightening to imagine, let alone contemplate, so I have great admiration for your courage.
Personally, I think none of us know enough about this particular situation or its motivations, to make comment or pass absolute judgement here. I do agree with George Broadhead, that we all have the right to self determination. I would certainly want my partner to allow me to go peacefully than struggle through a painful losing battle, more for his sake, and I understand people like Squidgy who have the opposite experience. But the law needs to change to help those to do what they believe is right for them whither their partner taking a conviction for manslaughter, because who would expect their partner to go to jail for a compassionate act of mercy?
And basically, god doesn’t come into this equation. Its a personal decision, one that should not be dictated by the interpretation of “gods will” by another.
Most of the comments above have been made in knee-jerk ignorance.
Ray Gosling was interviewed this morning on the Radio 4 “Today” programme. Go now to the Radio 4 website and use the “Listen Again” facility to find the interview, conducted by Sarah Montague. It went out sometime between 8.15am and 8.45am.
The gist of the information that was supplied during that interview is as follows. Gosling has recently been making a TV programme in the Midlands on the subject of Assisted Dying. This was, of course, harrowing to do. Amongst those he interviewed were many who had watched or were watching loved ones dying an awful long and painful death, but while we would all defend to the death our right to put down a beloved cat or dog in pain those people have been or are unable to assist a dignified death because of the current law. After conducting such interviews for his film Gosling felt that if he had any shred of integrity in him he was compelled to then turn the camera on himself and tell viewers that he had been in a similarly awful situation many years ago, at a time long before any life-saving treatment for HIV or AIDS, and that he had chosen to honour a pact that he had made with a loved one.
So what we have here is a situation where a dying person made a request, a pact was made, and the pact was subsequently honoured by the loved one. At that time there was no other alternative to such a pact apart from the dying person continuing to endure tormenting pain and indignity. And Gosling has very very bravely included this person experience of his in his film. It will be a film not to be missed. I hope it can still go out. I hope his personal admission will not be excised from the film.
Clearly from the many negative knee-jerk reactions above, this society has a long way to go before it emerges from its hypocrisy and its fear of worst-case scenarios and embraces the right of all creatures to die with dignity, when and how we wish.
I have a friend who when he comes across a dying bird, rabbit, or squirrel while out on a country walk cannot just shrug his shoulders and say, “Oh, well, that’s life, tough!” and pass on without mercifully and gently taking the animal and then suddenly wringing its neck to instantly relieve it of its suffering. I suspect the negative voices that have spoken above would not have the gumption or the adult maturity to do such a decent thing. The only choices they are happy to make are shallow ones concerning the colour of the unnecessary new sofa and the best T-shirt to wear to the next club night.
Let no further person comment negatively on this matter without going to the Radio Four website, finding this morning’s intervew and listening to Gosling recounting why he made the admission in the course of making his film.
I’ve never been much enamoured with Gosling, but for what he has done in the past twenty-four hours I take my hat off to him and offer him a great big hug!
Yes, squidgy, I keep seeing this argument about not being a burden and saving money and to me it is just unfounded and is just emotional blackmail. There is a legal device called Lasting Power of Attorney which can be granted to those selected by the person who is ill. This is split into a financial power of attorney and one for health. I’m no legal expert but having looked over them in relation to my Friends case, they will be very effective in safeguarding the rights of those with terminal conditions. While the same person or persons can hold both attorneys, there are legal safeguards which can stop any nonsense from going on. There will always be people who will try and circumvent the law, but by and large I believe it is a good protection and something which is not given enough publicity to those who would benefit from it. AS George says, you can make a living will, which is something I will be doing, even though my Partner knows of my wishes. If she isn’t there I don’t want someone else interfering.
I guess it’s easier to opt out rather than fight.
AngieRs:- and if that person doesn’t have anyone? There are lots of elderly people, and young who don’t have that structure.
Can you really stand firm and say this system if it came in would Never be abuse?
If Ray Gosling had a pact with his lover that once his suffering became unbearable then he would assist his lover in dying then fair enough. They should have investigated ways in which he could have assisted his lover to commit suicide.
This was not a sudden illness I imagine. I would imagine they had time to prepare.
Smothering someone with a pillow until they are dead is not suicide, or even assisted suicide. It is the ending of another person’s life. And that is illegal and will remain illegal even if the rules about assisted suicide are clarified.
“I guess it’s easier to opt out rather than fight.”
Really? Is contemplating your own death to save others around you prolonged pain and anguish, and leaving your partner alone, an easy “opt out”?
Sorry, but you make it sound cowardly, when in fact, to some people, its the bravest decision anyone can ever make.
“Can you really stand firm and say this system if it came in would Never be abuse?”
No one can. Can you say that the current system of laws governing social welfare payments are never abused? Or the laws governing prescription drugs, can you say they never abused?
The fact that there CAN be abuses does not diminish the need for the law in the first place.
“Can you really stand firm and say this system if it came in would never be abused?”
Squidgy, there have always been murderers and there always will be murderers. Get real.
Secondly, please become aware that in countries like The Netherlands and Belgium where “Assisted Dying” is legal, it is in fact very very difficult to terminate your life. But you can at least do it and thus end your life with dignity. In order to take advantage of the legislation in those countries, the person who wishes to die because of terminal illness or other unbearable situation must put forward their case to a tribunal, the case is then checked and re-checked with other professionals, there is a great deal of to’ing and fro’ing and only after all of these considerable and seemingly endless checks have been made, at considerable inconvenience to the person who is thinking ahead but still able enough to do so, is permission granted for doctors to assist the person’s death when the appropriate time comes.
This legislation has been in place for a number of years to date and there have been absolutely NO CASES where relatives or friends have come forward to complain that a loved one was assisted against their wishes. The complexity of the checking system simply does not allow for that to happen. It is just and transparent.
We wish for and need such intricate organization and legislation on this side of the channel too.
Don’t you think there have been hundreds of people over the years who have smothered loved ones with pillows to relieve them of their suffering? This should not have to be the case. If we have a system such as they have in Belgium and The Netherlands it will not be necessary.
There will always be the odd case though of some evil person murdering granny because they’ve had enough of her or want her money. That is a crime and will remain a crime.
Hopefully you can now see that Assisted Dying legislation works in our favour and has been seen to work very well indeed.
Will wrote: “The fact that there CAN be abuses does not diminish the need for the law in the first place.”
Well said, Will!
It seems clear Ray really needs our support on this one.
The first few negative comments on this thread were written by posters I’ve not noticed on these pages before, Godwyns, Gendy, Pax58, and others. One can’t help wondering if they are part of some irrationally-thinking pro-life group that are jumping on this one to propound their unmerciful view. They’re in line at the vets with their beloved pussies, asking for pussy to be put to sleep, but no way will they extend such kindness to those whom they say the love. One can only question the quality of “the love” they have for anybody!
No greater love for me could my partner show than to go against all his instincts and respect my wishes and end my life when I wish.
“One can’t help wondering if they are part of some irrationally-thinking pro-life group that are jumping on this one to propound their unmerciful view.”
I agree. Wouldn’t be the first time we had a pack of religious fanatics thinking that a few angry posts on this gay site will redeem their lack of conscience and get them a cheap easy ticket into their heaven.
Both the religious groups, the pro-lifers and the medical profession state that life is THE most important thing.
I disagree. It is the quality of life. Lying in a bed, unable to move, mentally driven to distraction, suffering immeasurable pain and slowly watching the life seep out of you may be life, but it is not one worth living.
I would find it hard to do what this man did. I would find it equally hard to ask someone to do it for me. However, one has to be pragmatic, and I see no reason to cling on to the last vestiges of humanity just so the people around me feel better.
It’s a shame the BBC have removed the Richard Dimbleby Lecture “Shaking Hands with Death” with Sir Terry Pratchett. It really brings home the reality of living with a terminal illness with the horrendous sword of Damocles hanging over the remainder of ones life. If you ever get the chance to see it, you should, along with all the pro-lifers, God-botherers and holier-than-thou doctors.
Sweet jesus. First time I have ever agreed with an entire post by RobN….
Well said, RobN. I applaud your point of view on this matter and the fine way in which you have expressed it.
No 37: Eddy: You say: “It seems clear Ray really needs our support on this one.”
I personally want assisted suicide to be regulated in the UK as it is in Switzerland and the Netherlands.
It is grossly unfair to prosecute people for helping their terminally ill loved ones to die.
However even when assisted suicide is regulated in Britain (along the Dutch or the Swiss model I reckon – whereby 2 separate doctors have to certify that the illness is incurable and terminal) then I can guarantee that smothering someone with a pillow until they are dead will NEVER be legalised.
Why did Ray Gosling wait until the point he did?
If his lover had Aids then he must have known some time before about the nearness of his death.
Why did Ray Gosling not facilitate his lover in ending his own life?
Why did he wait until he was in hospital to pick up a pillow and suffocate him? That was not his only choice. It was a very foolish choice as he actively killed his lover rather than allowing him to end his own life with dignity.
This is yet another good example of the religious lobby – the Christians and other undesirables – again interfering in people’s human rights, just as it interferes in ours as gay people.
I assume you refer a nurse working with the terminally ill an “other undesirable” as there’s no religious element Harry?!
I like debate and I happen to feel very strongly about this. Don’t feel I should apologise just because my opinion defers from some of yours.
I will never support what Ray Gosling, he is no hero.
Isn’t the true problem here not the right to die but the right to proper treatment? Even though I have been happy with most of my treatment mistakes have been made.
We have an election be fought on who would be given the best treatment under them? You will be seen in 2 weeks if you vote for Labour but not if you vote Tory. Why is that a political issue, why don’t we have the best treatment, for the best quality of life. Why are people in this country having to fight for life saving treatment, life saving drugs. In most civilised countries most patients don’t suffer the painful death that we seem to see in this country. Why is some parts of the getting better treatment… the list goes on.
In all if we had the best treatment Everyone of us deserves, we may not be fighting this at all.
I have known people who think they want an end to it when they get ill. I’ve also seen a lot of those patients change their mind, hence the ‘zest for life’.
When killing was legal before it was stopped because innocent people were dying and as much as the death penalty may be a good thing for some crimes, the thought of just 1 innocent person dying for a wrong cause should never be ignored.
Lastly, you have every right to decide your own death, I question roping someone in Against their instinct but a living will in writing allowing it to happen is your right. Whilst I sincerely hope no-one here gets terminally ill, if you do and you change your mind, I hope others around you will take that as your right to live!
Simon, answers to your questions can be very easily answered by the exercise of empathy, understanding, and compassion.
You ask, “Why did Ray Gosling wait until the point he did?”
Consider what happens when someone is very ill. They can deteriorate. When you make such a pact, you are in a state of turmoil as to the appropriate moment to carry out the promise. Everything in you hopes that if you hold on then the loved one may possibly recover somewhat, or at least achieve a bearable plateau, perhaps for a month or two more. During the time at home, prior to going into hospital, the person may not have descended into anywhere near the condition that he descended to later, while in hospital. And then during that time in hospital, there may well have been ups and downs. Good days and bad days. Days when the person may even have managed to smile, other days when he went through hell. That’s how it is. That’s the reality of a drawn out death, such as AIDS used to be. So why did Gosling wait till the point he did? Because that’s what you have to do: you have to wait until the time comes when you KNOW that the agony for the dying person is intolerable and you KNOW there is no way they are going to recover. You know this because you are at the hospital a great deal, you have been talking to the doctors. It’s the same as with your dog or cat. The moment is shows illness you don’t rush to the vet and demand it be put to sleep. That’s not what vets are for. The vet recommends treatment. You apply the treatment, you administer the drugs, perhaps the animal will undergo an operation. Recovery will hopefully occur. And sometimes the vet will warn you that the next time the animal shows the same symptoms another operation will not be possible. The animal may not be strong enough to withstand it. So the time eventually comes when you KNOW it is time to say goodbye.
You ask, “If his lover had Aids then he must have known some time before about the nearness of his death.”
Most probably, yes. As you know at that time, throughout the eighties and into the early nineties, if someone had “full-blown” AIDS it ended in death. What you could not know was the “nearness” you refer to. Some people went swiftly. Others didn’t. Their suffering went on and on and they just didn’t die. It was terrible. And the loved ones of such people had to deal with this agony. When would the person die? When would the dying person’s agony end? Sometimes there was no telling how “near” the moment of death was. Imagine the turmoil for friends and loved ones. Everybody knew what would eventually happen but just because you knew it would happen eventually you could not rush in there and simply help them to die there and then. Maybe they didn’t want to go yet, maybe there was still some person they hoped to say goodbye to. Maybe you caught the odd light or twinkle in their eye and you knew it wasn’t time yet despite whatever pact you had made with them.
You ask, “Why did Ray Gosling not facilitate his lover in ending his own life?”
How could he have done that, Simon? What methods are available in such a situation? The awful horrible reality in this country at the moment is that there is NO WAY to facilitate your loved one ending their own life in a humane fashion. Why? Because anyone who provides you with the knowledge or the means to do that “facilitating” will become an accessory to “murder” and so you have no access to humane ways of “facilitating” your loved one’s death.
The reality is this. If you, Simon, wish to facilitate a loved one’s death TOMORROW, all you can do is the following sort of thing:
1. Offer to scour the internet for them for methods on doing themselves in. But who has written up that information on the internet? If a method has been described as “good”, how do you know it is, or that it will work well? There is no respected or authoritative site you can turn to. It is illegal to publish the kind of help and advice you need. The only people who do it are wackos. Are you going to trust some untrackable individual who has dared to publish a list on the internet?
2. Discuss the methods you have found on the internet with your loved one. Which would they prefer: something mechanical like hanging from a tree under cover of night in a nearby wood, driving themselves into a lake in Wales at high speed, or locating a suitable cliff or accessible high-rise with concrete around the base?
3. Offer to drive them to Dover and carry them along the cliff-edge to a point from which they can then roll themselves over the edge, hurtle through the ear, and splatter themselves on the rocks below. But imagine the horror of having to go through that, for you, and for your loved one. Imagine seeing the rocks coming at you. Imagine looking over the cliff edge afterwards to check, and seeing all that is left of your loved one is massive red splodge on the rocks far below.
4. Offer to buy them some rope so they can rig up a noose for themselves in the garage or from a tree, and then carry them to the spot under cover of night when nobody is around. Just imagine: your loved one in a state of agony standing up on that chair, trembling with pain, and trying to rig up the noose, with you terrified they have got the knot all wrong and the death will go on for ages.
5. Offer to scour the internet for some “pharmacy” in Mexico or somewhere from which you will attempt to import a lethal drug. You don’t know who the supplier really is, if the drug supplied is what it is claimed to be. You aren’t even sure if this drug is the right drug for your loved one, if you have the right amount, how it should be best administered, if their will be a gagging reflex that might go on and on, if perhaps the drug will only cause massive organ-failure, not actually kill them, or result in brain-damage or a coma. And what is worse you know you can’t assure the loved one that the drug you have located for them to administer to themselves will actually “do the job”. They are full of fear and doubt and so are you.
So do you see? You cannot properly facilitate a humane death at this point in time under the current legislation. It is a complete lie that as things stand if people really wish to kill themselves they can do so: yes, we can all end our lives but only via horrific methods involving moving vehicles, razor blades, overdoses, jumping from buildings and so forth. Is this a humane alternative in a civilised society? No.
You ask, “Why did he wait until he was in hospital to pick up a pillow and suffocate him? That was not his only choice. It was a very foolish choice as he actively killed his lover rather than allowing him to end his own life with dignity.”
I have tried to show you above that we are currently denied the right to end our own lives with dignity. So Gosling could not, as you suggest, “allow” his loved one to “end his own life with dignity”.
You say “he actively killed” his loved one. That is an interpretation. I and many many others say “It appears that he bravely honoured his loved one’s wish”.
You ask again why Gosling waited till his loved one was in hospital and I have already answered that question earlier. You love your loved one, you wait until the pain becomes intolerable, and that point may not come until they have been in hospitable for some time. Remember, Simon, you might develop a painful kidney later today and by tonight you could well be in a hospital bed, in a private hospital or an NHS hospital. You’ll expect to recover, to be home in a day or so. But that may not be the case. Things may go seriously down hill. You could, conceivably, stay in hospital for weeks and weeks. For all sorts of reasons, for example catching a hospital superbug, you may start hurtling towards death. Your loved ones may wish for you to put out of your misery. Little did they know this would be the case the afternoon before you went into hospital.
“Your loved ones may wish for you to put out of your misery.”
Yours? or theirs?
Of course I can’t say it will never be abused, Squidgy, I said as much in my post but I think there are sufficient safeguards in the Lasting Power of Attorney regulations to prevent a good deal of it. But you talk as if these people will have no choice which is not at all what is being said by the advocates of assisted suicide and to construe the two is disingenuous or mis-informed to say the least.
Life or death decisions are taken every day in hospitals up and down the land, by relatives or doctors or the patient themselves. Look on the charts of severely ill patients, some will have DNR on them. Do Not Resuscitate. Either the patient has stated this, the relatives or the doctor. This goes on all the time, but it is commonplace and there are safeguards which prevent abuse. You tell me what the difference is between someone dying of a terminal disease and wants to go now and someone who dies of a terminal disease but who has stated that they do not wish to be revived, even if they can be and made/allowed to live a little longer. I can’t see much difference. It’s just the timing.
Squidgy wrote: “In all if we had the best treatment Everyone of us deserves, we may not be fighting this at all”.
Squidgy, if you really think “palliative care” is good enough for a person dying a long and agonised death, just please read all of the following, for starters:
She Didn’t Deserve This
by Polly Toynbee
‘Where’s Harold Shipman when you want him?’ my mother would say. But the law denied her a pain-free death. [Harold Shipman was the notorious British physician who took the lives of many of his elderly patients.]
They lie to you about birth and death. Modern medical fashions soothe the unsuspecting into believing the good birth and the good death are simply a matter of getting the right currently modish care — ‘natural’ entry into the world, eased ‘naturally’ out of it at the end with the right palliation. But these comforting myths are misleading and sometimes pernicious.
In the beginning the all-powerful natural childbirth lobby deludes first-time mothers into believing drug-free birth is a painless joy, as misdescribed in natural childbirth classes. The cult of the natural deliberately frightens women away from the drugs and modern medical techniques that can make birth safely pain-free.
Now I discover that they lie to you about death, too. The modern myth is that these days generous and carefully calibrated doses of morphine administered by the best palliative care teams will make final departure a gentle slipping away in pain-free dignity. But it is often not so — and people should know it.
My mother died three weeks ago, less than a year after a diagnosis of terminal cancer. From the start she faced its inexorable course with rational calm, unafraid of dying but determined to avoid lingering beyond what she thought bearable. She went to her solicitor and signed a living will. But all the same, linger she did, many weeks beyond what she found either dignified or bearable: it was no way to end a good life.
The NHS couldn’t have given her better or kinder care. District nurses came twice a day to check the pump that was pouring morphine into her bloodstream. Carers were on offer, with every kind of equipment delivered. An excellent palliative care team was on call 24 hours a day, with her own designated nurse, sensitive and thoughtful, who visited regularly. She had long home visits from the hospital’s palliative care consultant. All of them did all they could to keep her comfortable, pain-free, undepressed. But it was not enough. She wanted the one thing they could not and would not give her, however often she asked them — an easy death.
Palliative care as a specialism has transformed the treatment of terminal patients, dedicated as it is to pain relief. Before, doctors, interested only in cure and success, often ignored the pain of terminal cases past help. But because palliative care can now be so good, the myth has grown up that death is vanquished: just take the well-prescribed morphine and you can drift away on cloud nine to a contented oblivion. The truth about dying has been sanitised by comforting notions that no one now need exit life through the torture chamber. But for many patients that just is not so, however good their treatment.
Yet the medical profession keeps pumping out the myth that it can guarantee a good death. They were at it again yesterday, the mighty heads of the British Medical Association and the Royal College of Nursing in their letter to the Guardian. They were opposing the assisted dying for the terminally ill bill proposed by human rights lawyer Lord Joffe, now being debated in a Lords committee.
They wrote: “We know that some of the most distressing situations arise from individuals’ anxiety about maintaining their dignity at the end of life, combined with concern about the availability of effective palliative care. The RCN and the BMA believe that with proper pain control, good communication and psychological support, far fewer people would consider asking for clinical help to die.” They seem to suggest that good management can produce the good death: alas, even the best care can’t promise that.
The truth is that old-fashioned morphine in its various forms is not a good drug, but that’s all there is. It more or less conquers severe pain at very high doses, but not all the time. Forget dreamy psychedelia — it fogs the mind in unpleasant ways sometimes with unsettling hallucinations and, the doctors admitted, contrary to myth, it is a depressant. My mother did not want to live through her last weeks, despite plentiful visitors and a large family close at hand. Long, sleepless, painful nights seemed to her interminable, and dependency for all personal care insufferable.
“If I was a cat, you’d take me to the vet and put me down,” she would say. Or: “Where’s Harold Shipman when you want him?” Once she lost her independence, she never wavered in her wish to be gone. She had always said firmly that it should never happen to her — and she looked balefully at us for allowing it. Doctors and nurses were sympathetic but after Shipman the rules have tightened considerably: many whose GPs used to grant requests for a kindly injection to help see them off quietly are now kept alive unwillingly.
My mother had enough morphine pills in the house to kill her. But by then she had trouble swallowing the few she needed for pain control, let alone the 50 it might have taken. She said she wanted that instant annihilation that anaesthetists give before an operation: the injection that knocks you out before you can count to five. But no doctor could. The law denies the dying that escape.
She asked us to put her on a stretcher and take her to the Netherlands or Switzerland. But we blenched at the idea of a terrible journey of death. She begged for enough pills, but I found I couldn’t contemplate grinding up scores of them and helping her force them down. It is one thing to support her wish but quite another to live with the memory of killing your own mother. I was cowardly; she was disappointed in me.
It doesn’t altogether surprise me that a Home Office study found that 30% of mercy killers end up killing themselves in later life, haunted by it. It is more than families should be expected to do — though an NOP poll found 47% said they would help a relative in terminal pain to die. (I wonder if they really would, when it came to it.) The same poll showed 80% in favour of allowing people to choose assisted dying by a doctor: that is an overwhelming vote for the right to escape insupportable terminal pain and loss of dignity.
The medical profession is deeply divided on this, and the BMA conference only narrowly voted against changing its stance. The Royal College of Physicians has dropped its opposition, in favour of “studied neutrality.” The Lords committee is this week in Oregon, studying its “death with dignity” laws, and next week it will be taking evidence from a host of organisations, with the Voluntary Euthanasia Society mounting a vigorous campaign.
On the other side, the Daily Mail is fighting furiously against, with the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Roman Catholic cardinal together claiming “the respect for human life in all its stages is the foundation of a civilised society”. That is a religious view humans must endure, whatever their creator ordains. But 80% of the population don’t think the dying should suffer beyond what they can bear. The government? The betting is that they’ll go with the Christians and the Daily Mail, not with the great majority.
No 45: Eddy
I do have sympathy for Ray Gosling’s situation.
However I have far less sympathy for his decision to pick up a pillow and place it over his lover’s face until he stopped breathing.
I know full well there are doctors who when asked, will offer advice on failsafe ways to end one’s own life when it gets to a very late stage illness. They’ll tell the patient what a fatal dose of medication is and then it’s up to the patient.
It leaves the patient far more in control. They can decide when they want to go. And they can change their mind if they feel like.
I assume Ray Gosling and his lover had notice of the likelihood of his impending death. Aids does not kill overnight. If Ray Gosling and his lover had planned this properly and in advance I’d support him. In order not to be cuplable for his lover’s death Ray Gosling should have taken precautions to ensure that when the time came his lover was in charge of his own exit.
By suffocating him then Gosling ensured that his lover was unable to change his mind and was not in control of the situation.
I am in favour of assisted suicide in certain circumstances.
To suffocate with a pillow someone will never qualify as a suitable method.
The medical profession is there to keep alive not to kill. As I have already stated it is your right under the living will to do as You want.
May I point of that this 80% is NOT 80% of the population but indeed 80% of those asked in the poll. When wanting to get a survey to prove your point you will ask the right questions and ask the right people.
There used to be a time when we looked after our sick relatives nowadays we put them in homes and put them down once they become a burden. Yes AngieRs that word again. You may not like it but It is My opinion. Who cares if it’s right or wrong to who reads it, It’s mine.
Gosling tells of honouring pact with his dying lover:
I found your copy and paste Eddy from 2004? seriously? Smacks a bit desperate to prove a point. Least mine are my own, 2010 points.
3000 people does speak for 61 million surely?
Simon, you write: “I know full well there are doctors who when asked, will offer advice on failsafe ways to end one’s own life when it gets to a very late stage illness. They’ll tell the patient what a fatal dose of medication is and then it’s up to the patient.”
How exactly do you, Simon,”know full well” there are such doctors? How do you know that when the time comes and you approach whatever doctor you can access at that time, he or she WILL offer you help . . . when it is illegal for them to do so. The truth is: you are just hoping there are such doctors who will assist you. Well, unfortunately, “hoping” just isn’t good enough.
Let’s say a loved one of yours falls into a terminal state in hospital, involving continual and excruciating pain and you’ve been told there will be no end to it but eventual death. You ask the consultant to administer something to relieve him of this agony, i.e. you make it very clear you are asking for your loved one to be humanely put to sleep. The consultant doesn’t know you from Adam, Simon! You could be a nutter! You could have a change of mind tomorrow and expose him! He or she is not going to agree and find themselves arraigned before the law and possibly struck off! It’s not worth it. So you say to yourself, “Fine, I’ll take my loved one home ‘to die’, and I’ll get my GP to help me!” You make an appointment to see your GP. It happens she’s a good practising Christian or Muslim. Or it happens she just believes people have to endure suffering until they die naturally. You get given a good mouthful, and told to scram! Are you likely to go through the palaver of changing doctor’s surgeries via your local health authority just in the hope that the next doctor you get will be amenable to you? Should you have to do that? Should you be driven to do that? Let’s say you do it! You turn up . . . and they don’t know you from Adam in the new surgery! Square one. Your fu*ked, Simon, fu*ked! You’re driven to the internet, dealing with dodgy pharmacies in Mexico, trying to get dodgy drugs into the country that may or may not do the job. You are all alone. You and your loved one, embarked on a perilous and harrowing mission that could go horribly wrong. Is this humane? Is this civilised? If you had to go through this palaver when your pet dog develops cancer, would you not get very angry?
Please read all my answers to you above, at #45 again.
And please read the reality of so-called “palliative care” at #48.
Squidgy, you are a shallow and pathetic little fool if you deride Polly Toynbee’s account of her mother’s unbearable death purely because it is dated 2004, or purely because you found some petition in favour of Assisted Dying signed by 3000 people. For goodness’ sake, stop and READ and DIGEST the Ms. Toynbee’s words.
I mentioned on another forum the situation where someone has a beloved pet that is nearing the end of it’s life, and the owner says “I think it’s about time we put Rover to sleep”. I have done it twice in my life where I have had labradors die in my arms as the vet administered a lethal injection. I did it to relieve the animal’s suffering, and not out of some self-righteous reason, or just to get rid of it. It broke my heart to do it, and I had guilt pangs for months afterwards.
There is no way one could equate a dog with a human being, but nobody really bats an eyelid when they have an animal put down,
but I do see strong parallels.
Somehow, some seem to think that there is a scenario where Granny is going ga-ga, and we could do with selling her house, so let’s have her ‘put down’. Apparently, in most cases, doctors claim it’s the families pleading with the doctors NOT to switch off life support systems in the vain hope that there may be some change.
On the flip-side, our country is fast becoming overburdened with old people incapable of looking after themselves, children that don’t want them, and a state that can’t afford to care for them.
Much that I totally understand both sides of the argument, it is going to have to be a VERY strict set of rules to govern euthanasia and assisted deaths.
Oh, and please stop using the term “assisted suicide”, I’m sure these people would want to live if their lives were worth living. It is not suicide, it is merely accelerating the inevitable.
“I’m not afraid of dying – I just don’t want to be around when it happens.” – Woody Allen
Least mine comment was ment in jest Eddy, you seem to get insulting. My point was if I want to read Polly Toynbee’s account I’d read it. Or I guess I can read it from you. I like debate with the persons argument. I lived watching my partner dying and despite everything he went through, the pain, everything he wanted to be kept alive for as long as possible. It was extremely hard but when he passed I drew strength from that because of his determination.
It seems I have to apologise to you as you think IM shallow and pathetic from seeing someone I loved with all my heart die painfully yes but from a different prospective that he want to live every day. Living through that and helping other dying people be comfortable is hardly shallow nor pathetic. I’d like to see you cope.
It’s been 6 years since my partner died and I never will forget his courage, his determination for life. And it seems for that because I see things differently I have to be insulted.
Think that says it all about you Eddy. How very sad but cheers anyway.
And in related news, work productivity among gays and lesbians fell by 25% following the revelation of a gay mercy killing…..
Eddy one more thing, I don’t agree with you and probably never will. That doesn’t you right or me wrong but seriously get over it mate. If you don’t like other people having a different opinion or hearing it without getting personal there’s one answer:
Don’t do what you can’t handle.
I am also a long term survivor and I’m still here (minus the christian god theory)for whatever reasons science and life threw at me. Us long termers did not know pills were coming our way and even back then we did not believe they were going to prolong life. I can understand the hopelessness felt back then. I feel very uncomfortable with the fact that this man smothered his partner with a pillow until he stopped breathing. I can imagine the head-space but cannot imagine the mind that drove the action to do that. I cannot add anymore.
Squidgy, please consider that YOUR experience as the loved one of a dying person is NOT everybody else’s experience as the loved one of a dying person.
Let me paint a couple of pictures for you of a very different loved one who is dying. Both are true. I have had experience of both.
1. He has been constantly coughing for six weeks. By “constantly” I mean coughing every five to ten seconds, non-stop. His throat is in an inflamed mess. His voice is rasping because of the state of his throat. At night he takes over-large doses of cough syrup to try and shut down the coughing in order to get a little sleep. Doctors say they can offer him nothing else. At the same time he has lost a great deal of weight. He has lost his appetite. He doesn’t have the desire to eat. His feet are swollen to an enormous size and for some reason they itch uncontrollably. He wants you to rub them and scratch them for him ceaselessly but you can’t or they would become raw. This is a man who is dying in an awful way. Some people die quietly, lying in a bed, hardly aware, and weak, drugged by morphine. This is not this man’s situation. He wants an end to it. It’s unbearable for him.
2. She is simply very old and unfortunately riddled with very serious arthritis. Every joint in her body aches with excruciating pain. A sheet lightly pulled across her skin feels like a tiger’s claw being hauled through her flesh. The doctors administer morphine every time she begins to call out in her agony. But sometimes this old woman can barely summon up the strength to call out, and so she suffers horribly until the pain increases to such a level where she shrieks and if she’s lucky a nurse happens to be near and happens to have the time to fetch an orderly to go to the other side of the hospital to get another quantity of a drug that helps to relieve such exceptional pain. This cycles goes on and on. When the drugs hit her system she fades into a state where she is barely aware of the people around her. Her family visit but she is “out of it”, she doesn’t know they are there. She’s not just lying in a bed, reasonably comfortable, seeing people for the last time, and stoically waiting for the moment when her heart beats its last. No, she’s in agony. And she doesn’t want this.
Do you begin to see, Squidgy?
If we are humane and civilised we cannot stand by and not mercifully end such people’s suffering WHEN THOSE PEOPLE HAVE PREVIOUSLY ASKED US TO TAKE ACTION IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES.
Comment 29 Eddy said “Ray Gosling was interviewed this morning on the Radio 4 “Today” programme. Go now to the Radio 4 website and use the “Listen Again” facility to find the interview, conducted by Sarah Montague. It went out sometime between 8.15am and 8.45am.”
I found the link for people: http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_8517000/8517590.stm
Seems a pretty legit reason for admitting what he’d done. He’s honestly emotional there and he’d be a worse person if he was a ‘traitor’ and made a film about it without admitting it himself. I don’t like his attitude to the interviewer though, but.. I guess this is more than that. Interesting what he said about the doctors
Personally I don’t know enough to really judge but if people are worried about euthanasia being abused can’t there be better restrictions. It’s gonna happen either way and ppls loved ones are going to be punished for it. If someone agrees to an authority and has a signal or something.. surely that’d mean less abuse than no regulation/way out at all.
Sorry if this wasn’t too coherent, I’m multitasking.
purple_squirrel: “Sorry if this wasn’t too coherent, I’m multitasking.”
Hmm. Must be a woman then… ;)
Eddy:- You clearly don’t read threads. You bully and make up what you believe to suit your own needs. Then insult people for holding a different believe. I really don’t care to repeat or even copy and paste all last messages. You twist things and then…well
No Eddy, you don’t need to tell me, giving me examples, nurses don’t need to be patronised by little oiks like you, we’re not blind. You clearly think you know it all, so who am I to argue with you, frankly your boring.
You will not change my mind. End of. Guess thats how the mind works. Or prehaps you need a lesson (from someone who knows)in that too. I came on because I Have seen, and very importantly, even though you will ignore this again, It IS Your right to a living will doing what you want. There, repeating myself for you. I just don’t HAPPEN to AGREE with it. I really don’t see why that should be a problem to you. Do people not agreeing threaten you in some way? Still if insulting people is your way then all I can say is, you must be very lonely.
Looks like Eddy’s made another friend. Bullying, insulting and bullsh!tting his way round the forums attacking anyone that doesn’t follow the “party line” of a left-wing, socialist, Labour supporting bunch of politically correct idiots that are prepared to let this country go down the pan as long as the gays are looked after.
I believe a large number of other posters know that when I meet narrow-mindedness, idiocy, lack of compassion, superficiality, a total inability to exercise empathy, and belief in the supernatural, I do not allow individuals proclaiming views stemming from such positions to reign supreme, as they would like.
Gay liberation has not achieved the massive progress it has in the last fifty years because people backed down and shut up when the negative, pessimistic, nay-sayers started up their vociferous blather.
“I do not allow individuals proclaiming views stemming from such positions to reign supreme, as they would like.”
RobN was right, thats a typical Labour ploy. Who gave you the right to be in charge. Who gave you the right to bully others just because they think differently from you. Your way is a very communist attitude so yes, Labour must love you.
You have just proved that you have no knowledge of how to debate. You have to be nasty because others think differently. You truly are a boring individual.
If everybody thought the same as you would have us, man it would be a bloody boring ol world. Personally I like variety, opinions, strong minded people. True arguments don’t end with insult.
When people feel the need to insult others because of their opinions, it is a classic case of you have lost the argument. Your very weak and not worthy of any more comments.
Squidgy, Eddy has not been nasty to you or anybody else. You are offended because he has shown you up. He said you have to be shallow to have said what you have and I agree with him. Eddy is arguing rationally. You’re the one who is getting all upset and latched onto RobN’s use of the ploy of screaming “Bully! Bully!” Sorry, it doesn’t work. You can’t scream “Bully! Mummy save me!” everytime someone shows up the shallowness of your arguments!
I wouldn’t waste my time gettin upset Sally. I only debate on something I feel strongly about. I should be entitled to do that without bullied and called names. May I suggest you and Eddy learn how to debate. It could be a welcome start.
It just clicked Eddy+Sally same thing. Nice 1, very funny lol
Of course Ray was wrong in law and probably foolish to reveal his actions. But shouldn’t we see the programme before making further judgements?
David, I don’t know if the whole programme can be viewed anywhere on the BBC’s site (I haven’t searched) but if you go to YouTube and search for Ray Gosling you can catch the minute or so of the programme in which Gosling tells of his experience.
By the way, nobody on these two threads has yet written that Ray Gosling is a bloody good-looking seventy-year old, so I shall! I hope I look as good as that when I’m seventy!
How pathetic, Squidge. People who hold a view different from yours you lump together and dismiss. You’re laughable AND you’re clearly tunnel-visioned and thick-headed. No, that’s not insulting you, though no doubt you will feel your dignity has been attacked. It’s simply making a judgement based upon your many posts and your inability to see beyond your own limited experience.
All your gettin is pity laughs Eddy, its very sad.
Learn to debate or stop doing it. People can see for themselves now (message 65) what you think of people who don’t share your views. Your not worth it. Funny that part of this subject is about dignity yet you show none to yourself while your living by failing to excepting people will have different opinions to yourself. For everyone on this site that has a view I respect hugely for their view, they may differ from mine but thats what its about. You on the other I don’t respect not because you have a different view, (many other peoples and not actually your own) but because you can’t handle and won’t handle that anyone else may think differently to yourself.
If someone doesn’t agree with me so what, I respect that. That’s is what debate is all about. I like a challenge, I love debate, I love hearing all sides of the argument. What I don’t like is someone who can’t take it, becomes a bully and them shouts abuse and insults.
Seriously fella, I ain’t playing ya game now. I think differently. So what?! Like I said before, it doesn’t make you right nor me wrong. Deal with it.
This Is my last message in this topic.
“This Is my last message in this topic.”
Good. Excellent. So hold your tongue and engage your brain!
And if you engage your brain you may be able to start thinking DEEPLY and LOGICALLY. And when, or if, that occurs you may, possibly, cease to vomit ridiculous meaningless mangled utterances like the following from your “last message in this topic”:
“your living by failing to excepting people will have different opinions”
“For everyone on this site that has a view I respect hugely for their view”
“You on the other I don’t respect not because you have a different view, (many other peoples and not actually your own)”
“It just clicked Eddy+Sally same thing. Nice 1, very funny lol”
Why is it that when someone disagrees with you Squidgy, immediately you think anyone that agrees with them is the same person. You did this before. Eddie makes some excellent points. You can choose to agree or disagree. But either way, have the manners and intellect to discuss the issues on that basis. To go around producing some paranoid theory that “they’re all the same person” as some triumphant proof that you’re right is, to be blunt, rather ignorant.