> That made me think of a question. If you
have the technology to continue living forever,
but you chose to die, would that be considered
suicide? Like, now, having a Dr. Kavorkian
(sic?) unplug you is considered assisted
suicide, even though you are dying through
natural means. That question would have a
major impact on the response from the
religious community I think. I'm pretty sure
suicide is considered a sin, no?

It seems to me that there is a distinct
difference between suicide and, as you put it,
"choosing to die." The difference is one of
action vs. inaction. Suicide could be defined
as an action, chosen and taken by a person
with the direct intent of ending said person's
life, by whatever means.

Choosing not to take immortality treatments
doesn't have the same consequences. Yes,
the choice would mean that the person would
die, but not immediately and not as a direct
result of their decision. I would compare it to a
cancer patient choosing not to have surgery,
or radiation or chemotherapy treatments.
He's letting nature run it's course, not slashing
his wrists.