Jump to content
  • Welcome to AngelsWin.com

    AngelsWin.com - THE Internet Home for Angels fans! Unraveling Angels Baseball ... One Thread at a Time.

    Register today to join the most interactive online Angels community on the net!

    Once you're a member you'll see less advertisements. Become a Premium member and you won't see any ads! 

     

IGNORED

Assisted suicide to become legal in GB?


Recommended Posts

The idea that euro's are better than us is quite silly to me.  First of all, comparisons themselves seem petty.  Regardless a majority of western european countries are broke and eastern europeans seem to spend an inordinate amount of time killing each other.  Save the scandanavian countries which keep strong thanks to being homogeneous the rest of europe is meh.

 

As far as assisted suicide, I don't like it.  If someone wants to off themselves, have at it I just don't think the government should be involved.  I find it funny that many opponents of the death penalty (which I also oppose) are in favor of this kind of thing.  Do we really want the government involved in our life/death decisions?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except if someone wants to off themselves it's not as easy as just getting the necessary assistance to do it.  If someone else tries to help you I'm pretty sure they can get in trouble or at least that the authorities don't look too kindly on it.  The government wouldn't be involved in the actual decision of death it would be up to the person who doesn't want to suffer.  

 

I think it's ridiculous we pump people full of garbage that destroys their body just to keep them alive while they continue to suffer.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think it's a matter of people wanting the government to do it for them I think it's a matter of wanting it done right.  If the government wants to allow it so that private entities can legally do it that's fine by me but in the mean time while it's illegal you face the back alley abortion scenario where it's not done right.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If someone is helping another commit suicide I don't believe they should be in any kind of trouble. To me its just one more thing people want the government to do for them.

But won't someone be prosecuted currently if they helped out? I don't know who that could be changed without "more" government.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm,, tricky issue... do i think someone should have the right to die with dignity if there is no hope at all.. yes.

Do i think others should have the right to help them, or be involved in the process... no, i don't think i do.

I would not oppose making the necessary items available to the person, but if they are intent on doing this it should be them, alone, no help, noone else involved.  

Mainly because i think often its used as a crutch, or you see sympathy things like people not wanting to live without them.. or in most cases its the person "assisting" actually doing the actions that cause the death.    If the person is not capable of injecting themselves or some other reason why they cannot do it themselves then some medical option might be good but again it should in my opinion be something that the person goes thru alone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the person is not capable of injecting themselves or some other reason why they cannot do it themselves then some medical option might be good but again it should in my opinion be something that the person goes thru alone.

So you think the terminally ill should have the right to end their life but only if their condition has not advanced to the point the they are unable to commit the act themselves. That's ironic because you would think that the progression of their illness to the point that their motor skills are that severely impacted would be a heavy deciding factor in the debate as to whether they should stay and suffer or go with grace. You are basically saying that the people who want to live the least and who have the biggest reason to move on are the ones who have to stay and suffer. I don't get it.

Also, you say that the tools necessary should be made available but how? Over the counter? If not then wouldn't a doctor be required to write the prescription? Is he to be prohibited from "helping"?

Mainly because i think often its used as a crutch, or you see sympathy things like people not wanting to live without them..

I don't understand this at all. Please explain.

Edited by HaloMagic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

my issue, besides a spiritual one against killing, is how would someone determine just when a persons right to die has been met. what is the standard for that going to be? is a certain pain level? is it having a fatal disease? how would anyone determine that the criteria have been met for one to end their own life?

 

we had to put a cat to sleep because it had become unbearably mean to live with. it was tough to convince the vet that this was the best course of action for a silly ol' cat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I oppose the death penalty and am in favor of allowing one to obtain the help required to exercise their right to no longer live. To me they are two very separate issues. One is taking someone's life against their will and the other is helping someone end pain and suffering that they no longer wish to endure. With assisted suicide you aren't deciding that someone should die. The one who is dying decides that. And I believe they retain the right to make that choice. I don't believe I have the right to decide someone else should die but if that person decides for themselves I don't see a problem with helping them if they need it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My issue with the death penalty has to do with the finality of it in contrast to the number of times that despite the burden of reasonable doubt and virtually unlimited appeals they still execute innocent men.

 

If it can be demonstrated that the person has indeed requested to die then it's his/her choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you think the terminally ill should have the right to end their life but only if their condition has not advanced to the point the they are unable to commit the act themselves. That's ironic because you would think that the progression of their illness to the point that their motor skills are that severely impacted would be a heavy deciding factor in the debate as to whether they should stay and suffer or go with grace. You are basically saying that the people who want to live the least and who have the biggest reason to move on are the ones who have to stay and suffer. I don't get it.

Also, you say that the tools necessary should be made available but how? Over the counter? If not then wouldn't a doctor be required to write the prescription? Is he to be prohibited from "helping"?

I don't understand this at all. Please explain.

 

as i said, "if there is no hope" at what point do you make that call?  diagnosis, id say thats premature, medical breakthroughs happen.  There is no one size fits all here and there is no absolute answer, but the stance is simple.. when there is no hope, i understand it, till then, not so much.

 

As for how, obviously thru proper medical channels and authorizations as long as the above situation is met.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you have Netflix, watch "How to Die in Oregon". This will answer many questions about the validity of assisted suicide. There are many factors that must be met to be eligible for the "Death with Dignity" act. Allowing people to end their misery of terminal illness is humane. Forcing suffering people to stay alive by pumping them with meds is inhumane. We aren't talking about someone wanting to end their life because the Angels traded away 4 prospects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's ridiculous we pump people full of garbage that destroys their body just to keep them alive while they continue to suffer.    

 

I'm on the fence concerning assisted suicide, but I absolutely agree with this. Our health care system is geared to rack up as many medical bills as possible in an effort to prolong life-sustaining functions (not necessarily what most of us would call life, but things like breathing and digestion). The funeral is delayed for a month and the family gets $500K in medical bills.

 

When my mother passed away in 1984 - with what was considered to be "great" health insurance - the first of many medical bills arrived at the house the day we buried her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...