Euthanasia

[Skeetergirl291]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1326228039' post='2366488']
In China, they used to not undergo a lengthy expensive trial. They would shoot them and sent a bill for the bullet to the next of kin.
The money saved could then go towards the benefit of society.
[/quote]

ok, one: we are not China.

And, two: [i]Wow! [/i]That is shallow! Imagine that, "Dear Mrs. ___. Your son was accused of a crime, so, to save money, we didn't really do alot of investigation to see if he really [i]is[/i] the murderer. But we believe he was. But maybe not. Anyway, then we shot him. You owe us $___. Have a nice day!"

[Papist]

Yes, and the money saved could be used to euthanize those undesirables. You know those people that are depressed and don't care about life. Them peoples are a drag and the best solution to help them is to allow them to kill themselves. Forget about all the expensive therapy and counseling, just go behind the hospital and put a bullet in their head.

[stevil]

[quote name='Skeetergirl291' timestamp='1326228856' post='2366494']
ok, one: we are not China.

And, two: [i]Wow! [/i]That is shallow! Imagine that, "Dear Mrs. ___. Your son was accused of a crime, so, to save money, we didn't really do alot of investigation to see if he really [i]is[/i] the murderer. But we believe he was. But maybe not. Anyway, then we shot him. You owe us $___. Have a nice day!"
[/quote]
That could be taking it too far. Im not a proponent of Chinese law, but neither am I a proponent of US law. US law is too slow, cumbersome and expensive. Maybe there is an in between.
Anyway, this thread is about Euthanasia.

[quote name='Papist' timestamp='1326229016' post='2366495']
Yes, and the money saved could be used to euthanize those undesirables. You know those people that are depressed and don't care about life. Them peoples are a drag and the best solution to help them is to allow them to kill themselves. Forget about all the expensive therapy and counseling, just go behind the hospital and put a bullet in their head.
[/quote]
There would need to be some rules around euthanasia of course.

[Papist]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1326231288' post='2366509']
There would need to be some rules around euthanasia of course.
[/quote]

Hey, don't force your religion on me!

[Skeetergirl291]

[quote name='Papist' timestamp='1326231827' post='2366511']
Hey, don't force your religion on me!
[/quote]

[stevil]

[quote name='Papist' timestamp='1326231827' post='2366511']
Hey, don't force your religion on me!
[/quote]
Maybe an open minded society could come up with the rules rather than a religion?

[Skeetergirl291]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1326232719' post='2366520']
Maybe an open minded society could come up with the rules rather than a religion?
[/quote]

but didn't you, yourself, say:

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1325998600' post='2364849']
[by] Making Euthanasia against the law, you are forcing your beliefs onto others.
There are many people that don't believe a compassionate end to suffering requested by the patient is a sin, especially an athiest.
What value does it add to society to enforce this restriction into law? What business is it of yours if someone acts to end their own suffering?
[/quote]

so aren't you contradicting yourself?

Edited January 10, 2012 by Skeetergirl291

[stevil]

[quote name='Skeetergirl291' timestamp='1326235126' post='2366533']
so aren't you contradicting yourself?
[/quote]
Not contradicting at all. There are scenarios where people might choose to abuse euthanasia and kill someone for inheritance (for example).

Society does need some rules. What I am stating is that we could let society decide based on reason with regards to what makes a functional society.
If laws seem unnecessary for functioning society then allow people to make their own decisions.

Edited January 10, 2012 by stevil

[Skeetergirl291]

oh, ok.

[Papist]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1326232719' post='2366520']
Maybe an open minded society could come up with the rules rather than a religion?
[/quote]

A society that legalizes suicide has their mind so open that their brains fell out.

[stevil]

[quote name='Papist' timestamp='1326238779' post='2366554']
A society that legalizes suicide has their mind so open that their brains fell out.
[/quote]
Maybe Skeetergirl291 can include that gem in her speech.

[Ice_nine]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1326169058' post='2366176']
I don't contradict myself, I feel the issue is that you are misunderstanding what I am saying.
I am not pushing anything onto anybody, I am discussing, trying to influence. I do not have a gun against your head.[/quote]

Fair enough. But is it also fair to say by your influence you intend or would like to create/foster laws that have an effect on all of us? In that case, how could you not say your beliefs are being thrust onto others?

[quote]
With regards to law, I see it as affecting the people that are involved (the sick patient) not affecting the people (Christians like yourself) who don't want the people involved to have choices. You are certainly free to preach that euthanasia is a sin, you are free to try and spread this message and convince those that are dying that they ought to suffer rather than to chose a compassionate end.

[/quote]

Well first it [i]does[/i] effect me and everyone else because it violates human dignity and I am a human. It also has repercussions for family members and the greater community. Thirdly you imply a false dichotomy: you are either for euthanasia, or you lack compassion.

[quote]
I presume that you think your god creates rights.
[/quote]

Well, from God is where our rights originate. I'm not sure I would phrase it like that but for all intents and purposes you are correct.

[quote]I have posited that the nature of our Universe with the Physical Laws constraining what can physically be done, this constraint defines Physical Rights. It is an amoral, unintelligent rule definer.[/quote]

Now to me that's silly. To mean that just describes ability and capacity. Not anything to do with "rights" really. Your idea of how physical laws give birth to rights is flimsy at best.

[quote]Our government then defines Legal Rights by passing laws which put restrictions on Physical Rights. The government obviously cannot create rights beyond what is available via Physical Rights e.g. the government cannot pass a law making it legal to go faster than the speed of light.[/quote]

So you essentially believe that our rights are given to us by the government, so long as they don't violate physical laws, which they can't.

[quote]However there is another undocumented layer of rights that complicates this. That is what could be termed as Natural Rights. Society as a whole define this based on our lifestyles, cultural influences, education, evolved traditions, and necessity for survival etc. If a government attempts to violate some of these fundamental Natural Rights then society members will seek to oppose by force. These Natural Rights are still just a subset of Physical Rights.[/quote]

All this theorizing is great but there is no solid foundation upon which you stand. You differentiate between physical, legal, and natural "rights" (I put them in quotes because I believe your use of the term is quite idiolectic) for no reason other that you need to fit your perception of reality into your existing schema that there is no higher authority and there's no such thing as morality.

And then, even within your own free-floating system, you make the leap that natural rights are a subset of physical rights providing no reasoning for why that is. How is the "law" that I should not kick someone in the balls derived from physical law? It makes no sense.


[quote]Does your religion define that society should be forced to comply to all Christian morals via law? Is this what your religious leaders state? I thought the bible states that you should obey the law.
Your morality basis, isn't that a guide for yourself, on how you should behave in order to please your god?
Doesn't your god want people to have freewill, to chose between sin or no sin?[/quote]

Freedom means being able to do what you ought to do, not whatever the hell you want to do/can do. The Christian understanding of freedom is different from the more prevailing idea now.

And morality is a guide for myself, and part of this moral code is among other things to instruct the sinner, take care of the sick (not kill them), and uphold the sanctity of all human life other than my own.

Edited January 11, 2012 by Ice_nine

[stevil]

[quote name='Skeetergirl291' timestamp='1326237796' post='2366550']
oh, ok.
[/quote]
I hope I am just giving you some food for thought. If you address your opponents concerns perhaps even debunk them, then you are doing more than simply preaching to the converted with your speech.

[stevil]

[quote name='Ice_nine' timestamp='1326242561' post='2366583']
Now to me that's silly. To mean that just describes ability and capacity. Not anything to do with "rights" really. Your idea of how physical laws give birth to rights is flimsy at best.
[/quote]
Because all rules and hence constraints imposed on top of this are man made.
[quote name='Ice_nine' timestamp='1326242561' post='2366583']
So you essentially believe that our rights are given to us by the government, so long as they don't violate physical laws, which they can't.
[/quote]
Our legal rights are defined by government but there is a layer of rights between physical and legal.


[quote name='Ice_nine' timestamp='1326242561' post='2366583']
And then, even within your own free-floating system, you make the leap that natural rights are a subset of physical rights providing no reasoning for why that is. How is the "law" that I should not kick someone in the balls derived from physical law? It makes no sense.
[/quote]
And of course Natural rights cannot allow us to go faster than the speed of light. Natural rights must be a subset of physical rights, same reason why legal rights are a subset. Natural Law can only put constraints on Physical Rights, it cannot add to it.

[quote name='Ice_nine' timestamp='1326242561' post='2366583']
Freedom means being able to do what you ought to do, not whatever the hell you want to do/can do.
[/quote]
And hence we differ in a major way on this "ought to" aspect. I don't agree with Christian morality and I don't think all Christian morals should be put into law.
We certainly shouldn't make it illegal to have sex out of wedlock or to use contraceptives or to have affairs or to have gay sex, or to lie, or to work on a Sunday...

[Skeetergirl291]

[quote name='Papist' timestamp='1326238779' post='2366554']
A society that legalizes suicide has their mind so open that their brains fell out.
[/quote]

again, Papist!

[Skeetergirl291]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1326242571' post='2366584']
I hope I am just giving you some food for thought. If you address your opponents concerns perhaps even debunk them, then you are doing more than simply preaching to the converted with your speech.
[/quote]

thanks but... .i thought that you are my opponent

[stevil]

[quote name='Skeetergirl291' timestamp='1326245759' post='2366615']
thanks but... .i thought that you are my opponent
[/quote]
I have opposing views to you, but there is value in both of us trying to understand each others viewpoint. I don't see why I wouldn't want you to deliver a thoughtful and compelling speech. Good luck.

[Skeetergirl291]

couple more questions before tomorrows class,

what could I do, as a teenager, to stop assisted suicide?

and,

which U.S. house would i send a petition or letter to to stop euthanasia and assisted- suicide?

[Skeetergirl291]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1326246296' post='2366626']
I have opposing views to you, but there is value in both of us trying to understand each others viewpoint. I don't see why I wouldn't want you to deliver a thoughtful and compelling speech. Good luck.
[/quote]

that makes sense, thank you! i never really thought that two people could be friends like this when they're on opposing sides of a political debate.... neat!

Edited January 11, 2012 by Skeetergirl291

[Lilllabettt]

Suicide is against the law because it is a social crime.
Life is not something I possess. It's something I WITNESS. And all the people in the world are witnessing it alongside me.
In a way, I can't separate "my" life from theirs ... its not "my" life, its "our" life.
There's a very real sense in which all of humanity is "in this thing together."

So when someone chooses to end this "our" life ... its a betrayal of that deep, primordial social understanding. There is that sensibility that the dead person has abandoned the mission, turned back on the way. They no long want to journey with humanity to "see it through."