Right to die

[Reforged]

"My uncle is proof we do not always have control over our own lives, if we do not want someone extending our lives we need to have a living will made out for our doctors, stating only to have pain killers and water, when one is not feed there is no pain suffered, so we do have some control over our death, but no one should have there lives shortened by what people call mercy killing."

Sorry, no. I'm not letting this one slide. How is purposefully starving yourself anything other than suicide? What, thats ok but any other form of suicide or mercykilling is just a step too far?
Do you have any idea how much of a hypocrite you actually are? According to you self-imposed death is immoral, wrong and people who do it will be punished by God or whatever but the particular brand you guys carried out?
Nah, that was ok because it was natural. Newsflash; poking a bear with a stick or lying on the edge of a cliff that is likely to break off would both be "natural" ways to die. There are many and you could say "Oh look God did it" but you'd be talking bullshit wouldn't you? If you deny someone sustenance for an overly extend period of time then they will die. Thats what happens, God or no God. You all knew this and you went through with it fully expecting it to happen as a result, not through the power of "prayers" but because thats what happens. You starve someone, they die.
Don't try to give yourself a free pass you don't extend to others.

You're quite the piece of work, when I said we did not give him food, his time was short, no more than a day, the food could have extended his life and all would have suffered longer in that hospital room. I was talking about extending life, that's why I gave the example of my uncle, why is it you want to take what I write and turn it upside down to make it look as I said things I did not, please read more carefully. We were not trying to shorten dad's life we wanted to prevent extending it unnecessarily.

"We were not trying to shorten dad's life we wanted to prevent extending it unnecessarily."
Sorry, whats the difference? Isn't that exactly the right everyone who wants euthanasia to be legal fights for? To not have the lives of loved ones extended unnecessarily if it is painful and causing them distress?
His life was reduced, regardless of by how little, by the decision not to feed him and to provide morphine so starvation did not cause discomfort. Thats euthanasia and in the circumstances you described its perfectly moral.
Don't cheapen that by trying to employ a double standard so you can separate yourself from others who have done the same.