K
katie_tully
Guest
No it's okay if thats how you see it. I think we have to be careful if we're going to say things like 'it's giving up'.
Say it is giving up, say they're throwing in the towel. Who are we to say, 'too bad, dying is cowardly, live with it'?.
K
katie_tully
Guest
No I'm saying jumping infront of a train because you've had a shit day at work is cowardly.
As I've said, all pain is not relative. The 'pain' of having a bad day at work is not relative to the pain of your neurons demyelinating.
I'm only contradicting myself if I think suicide and euthanasia are the same thing. I don't. Call it semantics but I think they are, and should be separated.
Last edited by a moderator:
i think euthanasia is in the same catagory as abortion; it should be a case by case analysis and decision. it shouldn't be wholly legal or wholly illegal. its such a grey area that trying to legislate it in terms of black/white is illlogical.katie_tully said:
K
katie_tully
Guest
I went on the assumption that he was being serious.
Obviously there would be some need for moderation of the process.
Oh exactly. I'm not saying it should be legalised for the sake of making it legal. Obviously there is nothing stopping people from killing themselves. I think with euthanasia it's about making it formal, or less distressing for relatives. It's like with euthanasia you know it's coming, and you're not left scraping up bits of body parts from the train tracks.
Obviously there would be some need for moderation of the process.
working on your assumption he was being serious...
i'm sure how dignified you are going to appear to young folk is a top priority for a cancer/aids patient living day to day, knowing death is slowly but extremely painfully edging it's way towards you. you're a fucking idiot.Iron said:
Kwayera
Passive-aggressive Mod
So essentially, by that same token, contraceptives = encouraging promiscuity.beentherdunthat said:
The thing is, if people are of an age and mental state (something which people under heavy painkillers or pain legally aren't) where they can reasonably and soberly decide to end their life, having settled their debts and organised their affairs, they should be allowed to. You, the Government, or anybody else have no right to dictate how THEY choose to end their life based on religiously-backed "morals" of how it is "wrong" or "cowardly" or indeed, selfish. You have no right to dictate that.
I asked this of someone very wise: what would you do if you had a terminal disease, and why? They answered that they would kill themselves - not to escape pain or debt or just to "end it all" easily and painlessly, but because it would be the last decision THEY would make, the last action of control over their fate and yes, their dignity, rather than losing it to diseased senility or pain-rendered insensibility.
You have no right to deny them that choice.
Azamakumar
bannèd
.Kwayera said:
And also how many of you would be willing to endure witnessing years of your parents suffering, yet not quite dieing.
Kwayera
Passive-aggressive Mod
Azamakumar said:
Yes. I guess they've never seen someone close to them die of a terminal disease.
K
katie_tully
Guest
I lol'd at this for a few reasons (Iron's quote).
The pain gets to a stage where it completely immobilises a persons body. Once the pain is that severe, the dosage of pain killers is so high that it too immobilises the body. High doses of drugs such as morphine also wreak havoc on ones respiratory system. Not to mention they become totally dependent on somebody else doing the smallest things for them, even going to the toilet. So essentially they're living their last few months in bed, probably attached to a respirator and probably attached to a morphine drip.
Awesome way to live.
Iron
Ecclesiastical Die-Hard
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2004
- Messages
- 7,765
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2004
Jimmay misses my point, though his response was passionate and succinct, and I applaud him for that.
There is dignity in pain; in taking it, harnessing it and using it to concentrate every fibre of your being towards asking how well you've lived. It's the supreme and final lesson.
This also happens to serve as a reminder to assess how well we're using our own lives. This is the attitude which we should have to death, rather than 'they went peacefully/ better him than me/ I dont want to think about how valuable life really is'. Death isnt a culmination of increasingly great life experiences. You rise, plateau then fall.
It's grizzly, it's ugly, it's inevitable, but the point is mostly swept under the rug.
Having said that, I accept that there are some unnatural medical procedures which unnecessarily prolong the agony of a doomed life. I agree with euthanasia in these limited circumstances. But the important thing to me is that they have assessed their life properly, rather than slipped away when clouds started forming -- cheating death no less!
There is dignity in pain; in taking it, harnessing it and using it to concentrate every fibre of your being towards asking how well you've lived. It's the supreme and final lesson.
This also happens to serve as a reminder to assess how well we're using our own lives. This is the attitude which we should have to death, rather than 'they went peacefully/ better him than me/ I dont want to think about how valuable life really is'. Death isnt a culmination of increasingly great life experiences. You rise, plateau then fall.
It's grizzly, it's ugly, it's inevitable, but the point is mostly swept under the rug.
Having said that, I accept that there are some unnatural medical procedures which unnecessarily prolong the agony of a doomed life. I agree with euthanasia in these limited circumstances. But the important thing to me is that they have assessed their life properly, rather than slipped away when clouds started forming -- cheating death no less!
K
katie_tully
Guest
I don't condone euthanasia for the sake of 'ending it because it's difficult'. It's not as frivolous as that. Should it ever be legalised I would hope that's the stance they take.
That said, who are we to judge whether somebody has assessed their life properly? The worth of life is inherently different for each person, so who sets the bench mark for assessing who has the 'right' to end their own life.
Iron
Ecclesiastical Die-Hard
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2004
- Messages
- 7,765
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2004
I would say that almost everyone, and importantly the state, hold life to be very dear. There's just a blurry line between suicide and a humane release from futile suffering. This is a question for the individual to painfully beat around their conscience.katie_tully said:
Of course it's controversial for a state to put a value on life by legislating conditions where it's not worth preserving. I dont believe they should put themselves in the position of defining such a personal question.
K
katie_tully
Guest
Well then, what about the prosecution of those found assisting the suicide? If they're not to legalise euthanasia, should the sentence for those found to be assisting be reduced or nullified?
Iron
Ecclesiastical Die-Hard
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2004
- Messages
- 7,765
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2004
Only if you could prove that you were acting soley on their express wishes, the disease was painful as well as terminal, and the euthanaised was incapable of doing it themselves - not easy.katie_tully said:
How can you prove it was an independant decision? Were they acting on false information? Were they capable of reasoning? I'm sure there are lots of murderous rels with a big stake in the will who would be happy to claim assisted euthanasia, rather than see their share thrown down the drain in 'pointless' healthcare costs.
Also, why should only the lonely and abandoned be doomed to suffer?
K
katie_tully
Guest
Because they leave their $14m to their dog.
K
katie_tully
Guest
I know. And it isn't unrequited love either,