Man Who Died in Accused Final Exit Network Assisted Suicide Had Beaten Cancer
John Celmer, the man whose death is the subject of the Final Exit Network assisted suicide criminal charges, was not terminally ill. Indeed, he had apparently beaten his cancer. From the story:
John Celmer was making what his doctor considered “remarkable progress” last spring after two surgeries to reconstruct his jaw.Repeat after me: Assisted suicide is not about terminal illness, it is about near death on demand.
The 58-year-old Cumming man faced hip replacement surgery for arthritis, but he appeared to have won a battle against head and neck cancer. Then, he was found dead.
"His doctor was shocked," said Forsyth County Coroner Lauren McDonald III. "He said he shouldn’t have died." McDonald said an autopsy confirmed that Celmer, who smoke and drank, was cancer-free at death; the man had died from asphyxia suffocation resulting from the inhalation of helium. The death was ruled a homicide.
Labels: Assisted Suicide. Final Exit Network. John Celmer. Terminal Illness
posted by Wesley J. Smith @ 12:23 PM
7 Comments
7 Comments:
SHS: I don't understand "near-death on demand." "Death on demand," I understand. But why "near-death on demand"?
This afternoon I saw a Vanity Fair magazine on the newsstand (I can't remember what month it was but it's the issue that's now on the stands, at least here, and it has an article about "meet the members of President Obama's administration) and instinct told me to look at the table of contents. Well, there's an article in it about "the baby boomers" being concerned now about "end-of-life" issues, and the blurb on the article in the table of contents (I didn't look at the article itself; the table of contents entry was concerning enough) said that bookstores are now stocking a lot of books on "end of life" because of the demand for them. Just what one needs to see while out doing errands. We know what most of the books will be telling those who buy them.
This death was ruled a homicide. GOOD.
I notice that he was 58, and that the woman whose murder is mentioned in another item on SHS just below also was 58. As anyone versed in astrology who is reading this already knows, 58 is the age when a person has his or her second Saturn return (and give it a couple of years on either side of 58, too; this phenomenon covers a couple+ years and the exact time within that range when the phenomenon is most acute depends on the individual).
Saturn takes about 29 years to return to the same place in the zodiac where it was when one was born, and when it does, it brings tests and trials and a make-or-break situation; this i, have to face our own karma s a time when we are tested, may go through ordeals and fate (I don't like those words, but if any planet is associated with them, Saturn is), and either act responsibly, make commitments, and build foundations, or find that everything falls apart. If Saturn finds that one has acted irresponsibly since last time he came around to that point, and that one is still acting irresponsibly, Saturn takes one to task as only he can do.
At the first Saturn return, at/ca. age 29, serious things tend to happen, people go through ordeals and/or make decisions and commitments and assume responsibities that will affect the rest of their lives, e.g. marriage, career developments, etc. At the second one, at/ca. age 58, if one has not learned the lessons of the first one, one can experience a fall from grace, or die; if one has handled the first one well and done right, one can reach a pinnacle of success. A look at the obituaries and other parts of a newspaper tell the story: Note how often, when young people die, it is at about that age, and how often those age 58 or about 58 either have a fall from grace, die, or are named CEO/have other career success, etc. That's Saturn playing taskmaster, the tough teacher who tests one and, if one has passed, rewards one. Saturn is about old age, experience, discipline, seriousness, maturity, responsibility, hard work and hard-won rewards, or, if one has not earned the rewards, one gets punishement, reputation, career, success, destiny, "karma," etc.
But that's not the whole story, and bad things can happen at that time even when one has, apparently, done right; one can be quite vulnerable at these times; Saturn is not a cheerful planet, and can bring serious depression, as well as ordeals, at these times. No wonder, then, that both of these victims were 58 at the time they were murdered. Their challenges involved their health, and perhaps (and probably) other things as well, one way or another, and naturally they were seriously depressed at the time.
Those big on "karma" (which I'm not) might say, well, Saturn had come around and found them wanting, and they had to pay up, and that's why they died then, and those who "helped the die" were the agents of karma, and there are things beyond our ken in this lifetime that make sense spiritually from another perspective and it will all make more sense when we are in the next life looking back on things here, etc.-- to which I say, Baloney; what counts, and what things are to be judged by, goes on in this lifetime, and people are supposed to do right, period.
I say, these were people going through a tough time, and those who murdered them took advantage of their vulnerability and natural (and appropriate to the situation) depression, and let THEM have to answer to Saturn, these people didn't have to die and were not supposed to. I don't know what the circumstances were with the other victim, the woman mentioned not far below on SHS; this one had perhaps smoked and drunk before the first Saturn return, when he should have stopped and didn't; it could be that he paid Saturn on his second Saturn return with the cancer -- which he fought and beat. He wasn't supposed to have to pay with his life; those who killed him were the ones doing wrong. Saturn will attend to them, if not in this lifetime, in a future one, say those who adhere to the theory of "karma." Saturn rules time, and makes things take a long time to happen. As far as I'm concerned, they did wrong, they were supposed to get arrested in this lifetime, and thank God they did, and they'd darned well better get convicted and receive the most stringent possible punishment; they made someone else pay Saturn what that person did not owe, and it's time they were presented with the bill for what they did.
It's really bad gungee for this kind of thing to go on and upset the natural order of how things are supposed to be; it's the job of Saturn to say when it is one's time, not the job of assisted-suicide hobbyists, or even of oneself, and when Saturn brings the ordeal and the depression, one is being tested, and one passes that test by living, not by dying. These two victims each had another whole Saturn cycle ahead of them for the next 29 years in which to work and learn; not everyone gets to ca. 87; some go way past the third Saturn return (these Saturn return periods are when we "age") and it may be that we are all supposed to get to a fourth Saturn return at well over 100 (the number 4 is associated with this planet); but if any planet represents the ancient notion of the Fates who measure out the length of string that represents the length of one's life and snip it at the point when one's life is "supposed" to end, it's Saturn. It's his job, God's job, one's own job according to how hard one has worked and how well one has satisfied Saturn The Taskmaster -- not the job of creepy people who favor black and wear creepy sunglasses, "counsel" family members to "let them go," paint creepy pictures, exploit and abuse the vulnerable, hold plastic bags over people's heads and restrain their hands when they want to live, tell them to "go to the light," etc., etc. Those are just power-hungry sadists; they are criminals. Saturn is about working, earning, learning, doing what is right and responsible, living for a long time; he doesn't like criminals.
In other words, Saturn, the planet of age, old age, time, etc., doesn't like it when those things which are his province are taken away, and, as he moves slowly, but inexorably, the phrase, "The wheels of Justice grind slowly, but they do grind," sums it up. The picture in an entry below of a man who looks like he never heard of Saturn and what Saturn means and a woman who is trying to dress up to look like Saturn, according to her own conception of him, in sort of a female Kevorkian costume, tells us what their ilk is going to face eventually when Saturn comes around to visit THEM, if not in this lifetime, in the next one; as astrologers sometimes groan, even knowing the plea is futile, "Hurry up, Saturn!" He'll get around to them in his own time, though; that, we can bank on.
Ianthe: I said "near" death on demand because if someone had a whim or a sudden urge, I don't think that most death with dignity types would want assistance. If I say death on demand, which I have before but thought better of it since, and there is even one exception, the accusation will be made that I am exaggerating.
Wesley: I'm sorry; I still don't get it. Do you mean that the "someone" who had a whim or a sudden urge would be the "death with dignity" types themselves, or someone else whom they'd favor killing, and would the "death with dignity" types not want assistance for themselves to be killed, or for someone else to be killed? The person who would be dead is either going to be dead or not, and thus I don't see how it's exaggerating to say "death on demand." It seems to me that the "death with dignity" types simply want death (for others), no matter how "reasonable" they make a point to try to appear to be.
I am saying that most would not support someone being able to walk into a clinic and just get a pill to kill themselves, no questions asked. Nitschke feels that should be allowed. But most believe that there should at least be some reason that would be considered "rational." Thus, I don't think most would support someone coming in and saying, "My boyfriend dumped me an hour ago. I want death with dignity." If it was truly death on demand, any scenario would have to be accepted. So, I am being properly nuanced. You're a lawyer. You know how it is.
Wesley: Thank you. I get it now. I do know how it is. I do think that they grasp at rational excuses more than a bit too much, as with deliberately allowing doctors too much rein in declaring "on the way out," the forms and documents that are used to enable the syndrome, etc. But you give me too much credit; I went to law school but I don't practice law and am a professional astrologer; otherwise I might not be as blunt as I am here. I seem to able to miss the simplest points occasionally, but I like being able to be unconstrained from being able to be out on a limb, as it were, where the perspective is broader. In law school I was always getting told that the points I'd raise were "ripples against the tide," and then later in the lecture they'd turn around and say, oh, I see what you meant. In my first year, they thought the concept of animal rights law was preposterous; in the second year it made sense to them. Plus, imagine the nightmare for an astrologer of having to go to court at what one already knows is the wrong time, or telling a lawyer, based on the same principles by which one advises one's own clients on timing, etc. that such and such point should be in the papers, or the papers should be done, and filed, at this time, on this day, not that, and they won't listen, and the motion is lost, or what the other side, or the judge, is like, how they think, what they are going to do, etc., and they don't believe one until it manifests.
This business with "the doctor considered it remarkable progress," "so and so surprised the doctors," "the doctors were amazed," "the doctors had given him/her x time to live," etc. REALLY annoys me. They're mechanics. They aren't even taught to reason; only the very very best of them can. Medicine is largely an empirical science. If they spent more time observing, with humility, and less time thinking they know more than they do, a lot more patients would survive. It's also the fault of society for giving them more respect than they deserve. If this society respected and encouraged actual work, period, rather than money and success, and if those who are not "educated" realized how much smarter most of them are than those with "degrees," these marmalukes couldn't get away with what they get away with. The minute they are allowed to dare to give prognoses and say whether or not someone is apt to recover, give how much time, etc., the door is open to assisted suicide and euthanasia. THAT's the reality. The doctor thought it was remarkable -- who does that doctor think he is, anyway? Who do they think they are? Why do we think they're anything but what they are, which is a bunch of problems walking around in white coats. They are part of a sick society, and they happily feed its illness. There is something seriously wrong with letting them get away with their arrogance. But no one says anything about that. That's where this whole problem STARTS. Which it was able to because they were trained via the use of animal experimentation. Seriously, I recommend looking into what Neal Barnard, M.D, and the organization he founded, which is named something like physicians' committee for responsible medicine, have to say. Founded in ca.1984-5, it has become very well established. I helped with their first position paper; you should see the comments by physicians and medical students who oppose the use of animal experimentation, and their reasons.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home