Posted on 11/03/2014 6:36:33 PM PST by Sumner Worden
Hello, everyone. I'm new to Free Republic and I'm looking forward to the discussions.
There has been a good amount of coverage regarding Brittany Maynard's assisted suicide, and even more opinions thrown all over news websites and social media. After reading through a number of responses, I still didn't find the argument for the opposition of assisted suicide very clear. I understand that most Christians would be opposed to the act purely for religious reasons, but do those who oppose assisted suicide have any valid reasons without appealing to religious doctrine?
He hasn’t responded in 3 1/2 hours and 120 posts. I’d say that’s a textbook definition of a troll.
ah, Sumner ... posting a vanity and remaining silent is considered bad form in these parts .... (left and right head shake and walks away)
Because there is an infinite amount of things you can learn about yourself through suffering.
But I cannot look at it from a non-religious view point.
God made us, and only God should claim us. We’re like small children, and the Lord is our parent. Many things don’t make sense to small children, but our parents love and care for us, and want us to flourish. So it is with God. We may not understand pain and suffering, and we have to trust in His goodness.
Trust is difficult, but that is a lesson to learn, too.
The thread poster is still extant. I do believe that he, she, or it got
an eyeful of FReeper reactions to the OP and fled the scene.
Its posting history is this thread with no responses. I think a self-
immolation went on here, and that we will not see it again unless
it is under a different handle.
I suppose that I could use my “zoticide” post. Sigh...
Samson’s motivation was war/revenge not suicide. You might as well label everyone who volunteered to fight wars suicidal, especially on missions where the outcome was a guaranteed beautiful death.
Oh boy... Look away for an hour to do some homework and there are 44 replies. I definitely won’t get to all of them, but I’ll start with yours, Bull Man. Thanks for a reasonable reply.
It is true that nothing is stopping the person from killing themselves without the controversial assistance. But is a doctor selling poison the individual could use to kill himself/herself, acting as a free rational agent, the same as the doctor murdering that person? Although strange to think about, I don’t see the connection, mainly because the individual who purchases the poison is simply making a purchase for a good/service for something he/she personally finds valuable. That still sounds like suicide to me. And it still sounds like it’s on the suicidal person’s terms.
Since the final decision rests upon the individual who takes the poison, I don’t see how it could lead to something like the government killing off the elderly because they’re no longer useful. That seems like slippery slope fallacy. If the patient doesn’t want to die, then nobody can force him/her to die. If you take away the patient’s free will then you take away the entire rule of law.
But if somebody wants to die, who are you to force them to stay alive? Or who are you to deny the sale of poison that could do the job without pain in a controlled environment? I’m not saying this approach is “dignified” like Oregon’s policy names it, as people who suffer through terrible diseases to the very end are incredibly inspirational and brave; but I am saying that restricting people from doing this if they truly want to do it seems like an encroachment on one’s freedom.
Now, I am only speaking about people who are told they only have a short amount of time left in this world. And I do realize doctors can be wrong; there may be some posters here who were told something similar by a doctor but then managed to fight through whatever disease or health complication to prove the doctor wrong. But sometimes chances are so grim, especially with something like stage IV brain cancer, that i t would be absurd to argue otherwise. And if you’re in that position, I feel like you should have the freedom to dictate when you go. At least that will give you peace sooner.
Does that make sense?
Is there a law against selfishness?
This can’t be a real objection, it’s just a normative judgment. You may even be right, although I think your comment is a gross oversimplification of the issue at hand, but the fact remains that nothing is illegal purely for selfishness.
Good idea, umgud. I just made a response which explained some of my reasoning, but I’ll see if I can get it all out there with this response.
Whether you believe in God or not, I think we all believe that America is all about freedom. You have a right to your life and no person under any circumstances is justified in taking that away from you. But if you have a right to your own life, which basically means you can make decisions for yourself as long as they don’t interfere the other people’s freedom, doesn’t that mean you have a right to end your own life?
It seems like a perfectly rational person, especially under the circumstances that Brittany endured, could easily come to the decision that he/she would want to end his/her life before suffering through immense pain. And I certainly don’t blame the person; I can’t imagine the terrible afflictions that the person would experience from something like brain cancer.
So this perfectly rational person, if they are truly free, should be able to decide to die whenever he/she pleases (so long as nobody is dependent on this person, such as a little boy or girl or something of that nature). It is this person’s right to do so, and if he/she can buy poison from a doctor to make the process painless in a safe environment, then why shouldn’t he/she be able to purchase that?
It just seems like people want to keep other people alive for their own reasons against that person’s free will. I understand why - dying is a terrifying thought. I also understand the religious reasons against it, and I have no qualms with that. But in a democratic country where religion doesn’t dictate the law outright, and its citizens are mostly free, then there seems to be no reason to object to somebody killing themselves before a disease does the job.
Hey MeshugeMikey,
No, I do. I think we just have a different conception of objective truth. But that’s a whole other discussion! I’d be happy to speak through private messages though if you’re interested in having it. Or even starting a different thread about it.
DBrow,
Thanks for the heads up. I’m working on some other things so I was away from my computer for a bit. Didn’t think the conversation would ramp up so quickly!
Damn, you guys are good! I haven’t posted on that blog for over 6 months. Been too busy unfortunately.
erod,
Might be the case, but it doesn’t really matter to me all that much. I like some Republicans and I like some Democrats. There are some good ideas on both sides, the problem is just figuring out which ones to choose from that will function best in a free democracy. I don’t think one side has all the answers.
I do know that most of the politicians in office now aren’t too great. I think both sides have been losing for quite a while...
Lol yeah... Something like that.
Three points:
1) Sarcasm, bud ;). To be fair, it is difficult to catch sarcasm through a computer screen, especially without knowing my mannerisms to begin with.
2) That was the start of a post in which I reject moral relativism even though I’m an atheist.
3) My lack of belief in God is irrelevant, isn’t it?
Lol?
We’d probably have to start a new thread to talk about that. Or do it through private messaging. But I’d be happy to answer the question - which method do you prefer?
Oh, and it’s not any of the ones you listed haha. Especially not Marx and Mao. Come on, give this heathen a bit more faith than that ;)
And have a conversation with the people here! But because I’m new there’s a ridiculous delay so my posts aren’t coming up...I’ve been waiting an hour responding to the posts here but not one has gone through.
But the reason I joined this site is due to the fact that it’s full of very conservative people. I’m not exposed to those ideas on a college campus, as you can imagine, so I figured joining this site would be good. I’ve gotta be careful though. Since I disagree with a lot of main tenets of the far-right, my posts might look like trolling or something.
I didn’t come here to stir up any problems, just for some respectful conversation.
Morgana,
I appreciate you sharing this with me. Although it will probably never go away completely, I hope the pain lessens with time. I wish you the best.
I’m considering this issue under the context of a terminally ill patient rather than a relatively healthy individual with plenty of time left. As you’ve shown, the question of suicide generally is a completely different beast.
Do I think people shouldn’t be forced to live in this world if they don’t wish to? Sure, in that sense I can understand suicide generally. But people are rarely without connections to other people, and as you’ve stated a suicide can have a devastating impact on those who were connected in some way. It’s a terrible tragedy when this type of suicide occurs, I think more so than the type of suicide Brittany went through.
I don’t know if there’s a right answer to it. On one hand you can keep the individual from committing suicide in some way, but you’ll have the tormented individual going through a literal hell on Earth. Well, assuming therapy or medication or some other potential solution does not change the individual’s self-hate. On the other, the individual does commit suicide and the family or anyone close to him/her are distraught, usually for the long-term. Either way, people go through torment. It’s a tragedy. And once again, I’m sorry you’ve had to experience it. Especially more than once.
You have way too much faith that government will stay within the boundaries you prescribe. At this very moment, there are Christians being forced to do things against their faith because of gay marriage. I’m sure I don’t have cite them, there are many from pastors to regular church members who are facing following their faith or being fined or incarcerated. Why would you assume government overreach would not be worse in this case. Will doctors be fined if they refuse what you now call “treatment?”
When Jefferson wrote: Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness you will note that by beginning with “life” he was acknowledging the tripartite would be rooted in the natural law of the sanity of life. In itself assisted suicide may seem harmless, or even compassionate but it contributes to a cultural ethos where life (ie humanity) is lessened. The moral hazard will be pernicious to culture.
There is nothing more personal than death (I know that sounded like a joke, but bare with me). “Helping” someone die by definition makes it less personal and more public. Did you read just last week, the Feds are now going to begin “end of life” counseling for people under Medicare. It isn’t a fallacy to see this ending poorly, or at least contributing to a culture of death more than life. Think about it, the same people that are to provide healthcare will also be involved in deciding how/when you die...oh yes, the always present compassion. Maybe it’s just because I’m a libertarian, but I sure don’t want the same people with a financial stake in my quick death paying for my healthcare to keep me alive.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.