I'd wonder what they would have been saved from. It draws attention to the cause of death.

Beautiful sentiment.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a fan.

Op here. Thanks PP. Does it make you feel uncomfortable? Or just is it cheesy? I’m curious as to how people will receive this. Many are in their 60s + .

When in history has anyone lived forever?

+1
It strikes me as odd sounding. But funerals and related stuff are for the living so if it gives you comfort, that’s ok.

While it is sad when parents die, unless they are dieing when a child is still young it’s unfortunately just life. No one lives forever and few live to 100. (Agree that if this is for a child then it does sound less strange as kids aren’t supposed to die).

I'm not religious, but don't certain religions believe you live forever on the other side i.e. heaven.

So if you are loved and live forever on the Earth side, you would never go to heaven?

I have a terminally ill family member and honestly the whole concept of "saving" just comes across as a bit gross.

Of course if there was anything we could do, we'd do it. Thinking if she'd just gotten the scan earlier or similar (though in her case, it probably wouldn't have). But the random unfair stupidness of it is frustrating and thinking about wishing it never happened or it wasn't real doesn't actually make it any better. It just sucks and is unfair.

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like something people say when they've lost someone to addiction. It's the idea of needing to save someone. It also emphasizes the survivors and their feelings over celebrating the loved one. Focus on what was memorable about them.

OMFG, this would be so tone-deaf at a service for someone who died of addiction or suicide. Yikes!

It’s not only cheesy, it’s self-important.

Anonymous wrote:It sounds main character. All about them, not the person.

This. Memorials are for the living/survivors, so I get it, but... we know you're grieving, and we know you love(d) the person you lost. Let us know you understand people die by not using "forevers" like this.

I don't like it. It seems twee and naive. Every living thing dies, loved or not, and if you're throwing a memorial for someone, obviously at least one person loved them and cared. I feel like this is overly sentimental in a way that is distracting. I also don't want to live forever, and want my family to be able to let me go when I'm gone, so I wouldn't want them to cling to my loss this way.

But...

It's not my family's memorial. If this fits your family, gives you comfort, soothes your grief... do it. I love it for you. It's just not for me.

You should absolutely do what you and your family want.

But how I would read it if I received it? It doesn’t seem like a sentiment for the natural end of a many multi-decade life. It reads to me like a life shorter than expected. For what it’s worth, I’m a person dealing with fairly critical issues with a parent, and the sentiment just seems misplaced? Bodies and mind wear out.

A person earlier asked if you wanted help editing. I’m loath to suggest anything until you comment. Also you are not savior- this sounds like it’s about the surviving relatives not about impact of the parent.

Otoh, this would be perfect for the girl from Tuck Everlasting.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a fan.

Op here. Thanks PP. Does it make you feel uncomfortable? Or just is it cheesy? I’m curious as to how people will receive this. Many are in their 60s + .

When in history has anyone lived forever?

Very pathetic.

Tough crowd. I’ve heard this before. Doesn’t bother me at all. It’s a nice sentiment.

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like something people say when they've lost someone to addiction. It's the idea of needing to save someone. It also emphasizes the survivors and their feelings over celebrating the loved one. Focus on what was memorable about them.

dp. This exactly sums it up.