U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 04-01-2009, 10:36 PM
 
Location: Pensacola, Fl
656 posts, read 951,976 times
Reputation: 373

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok View Post
This is ludicrous. People who commit suicide are often times not capable of consent. They are temporarily "insane" if you will. Something like 90% (or more) of people who attempt suicide and live through it are HAPPY later that their attempt was not successful.

If we're talking about people who have terminal illnesses, I can sympathize with this view. But if you're talking about someone who is depressed or who has experienced some type of crisis (other than personally having a terminal illness), this idea is insane....no offense.
None taken.

But tell me, what is the definition of insane or insanity?

Here's a little fun fact; the definition of both insane (or insanity) and cognitive dissonance go hand in hand. A little food for thought; munch on it for a bit.

People who commit suicide aren't mentally retarded who don't know better; they are usually people who are depressed (whether it be from physical issues or mental ones); hardly would they classify as insane.

It goes back to the old saying, 'if there's a will there is a way.' If someone wants to kill themselves then no one can stop them. I see it as pointless to admit someone to an asylum for attempted suicide which will probably make the person even more likely to kill themselves (it's an insanely high number of people who are admitted to suicide asylums that eventually do end up killing themselves). You can't stop someone from killing themselves; you can deter them from making that decision (which I advocate) but to me it is pointless to prosecute someone in a failed attempt. Most people who think about, attempt, or do commit suicide do so because they believe that no one understands them (and they also think of it as a way out and a release) and instead of others trying to talk to them like people they ship them off to see a shrink (or stow them away in an asylum) which further instigates that feeling. At one time, I was suicidal (never told anyone, didn't want to be considered a loony tune) and some of my friends were also (I actually had two I can remember that cut themselves on a regular basis and one of which who told me she thought of suicide on a daily basis. Also knew a girl that tried to kill herself by drinking household chemicals but failed). I can't tell you how many times in the past I've heard my parents whispering (or blatantly telling) me that I needed to be taken to the doctor, that I needed to see a shrink, etc., etc., etc. Suffice to say, I'm happy that I did not attempt (I have some pretty awesome friends) but everyone is not as lucky or does not have access to outlets to deter them (friends, family, someone they can talk to) and end up feeling trapped in a life they do not want to live. It is from a lack of understanding and a stigma society has about suicide that often adds to this feeling of entrapment. I say if someone is thinking about suicide, by all means, try to persuade them from doing so, but don't throw them in an asylum or have a shrink talk to them about their 'problem' because in most cases it often facilitates the problem.

Quote:
Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok View Post
If "you know this" means that's your opinion, fine. If it means that the adult's rights trump the child's and that is an absolute fact, you need to realize that it is actually only your opinion.
I realize that it's my opinion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok View Post
Decisions regarding medical necessity should be made by a minimum of two physicians using criteria determined by a state medical board.
I can agree with that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-02-2009, 12:55 AM
 
1,245 posts, read 1,228,908 times
Reputation: 282
Quote:
Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok View Post
To some of us, abortion is murder. Murders of those of us who have been born are going to happen anyway so ask yourself whether you would be willing to allow the government to legalize and regulate them as well.
Yes but that is a very idealistic way of looking at the world. When you are a realist and think of viable solutions to real world problems, simply banning abortions isn't going to stop people from having one, except now the fetus AND the mother are both in jeopardy now.

Just because you believe something to be wrong or immoral doesn't mean that it should be outlawed. There is the welfare of an entire country to consider, I guess I'm trying to say that you really need to look at the big picture.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2009, 07:04 AM
 
Location: Texas
14,969 posts, read 13,770,331 times
Reputation: 4539
Quote:
Originally Posted by kb09 View Post
None taken.

But tell me, what is the definition of insane or insanity?

Here's a little fun fact; the definition of both insane (or insanity) and cognitive dissonance go hand in hand. A little food for thought; munch on it for a bit.

People who commit suicide aren't mentally retarded who don't know better; they are usually people who are depressed (whether it be from physical issues or mental ones); hardly would they classify as insane.

It goes back to the old saying, 'if there's a will there is a way.' If someone wants to kill themselves then no one can stop them. I see it as pointless to admit someone to an asylum for attempted suicide which will probably make the person even more likely to kill themselves (it's an insanely high number of people who are admitted to suicide asylums that eventually do end up killing themselves). You can't stop someone from killing themselves; you can deter them from making that decision (which I advocate) but to me it is pointless to prosecute someone in a failed attempt. Most people who think about, attempt, or do commit suicide do so because they believe that no one understands them (and they also think of it as a way out and a release) and instead of others trying to talk to them like people they ship them off to see a shrink (or stow them away in an asylum) which further instigates that feeling. At one time, I was suicidal (never told anyone, didn't want to be considered a loony tune) and some of my friends were also (I actually had two I can remember that cut themselves on a regular basis and one of which who told me she thought of suicide on a daily basis. Also knew a girl that tried to kill herself by drinking household chemicals but failed). I can't tell you how many times in the past I've heard my parents whispering (or blatantly telling) me that I needed to be taken to the doctor, that I needed to see a shrink, etc., etc., etc. Suffice to say, I'm happy that I did not attempt (I have some pretty awesome friends) but everyone is not as lucky or does not have access to outlets to deter them (friends, family, someone they can talk to) and end up feeling trapped in a life they do not want to live. It is from a lack of understanding and a stigma society has about suicide that often adds to this feeling of entrapment. I say if someone is thinking about suicide, by all means, try to persuade them from doing so, but don't throw them in an asylum or have a shrink talk to them about their 'problem' because in most cases it often facilitates the problem.
I don't think most of them are committed to asylums. If at all, it's only for a 72-hour hold usually.

I'm not saying they should be committed, but I'm also saying that no one should be legally permitted to help them do the deed. When someone is so distraught that they are seriously considering suicide, it opens up a lot of room for coercion. I question the capacity of such people to "consent" to anything...especially when statistics prove that very few people actually WANT to take their own lives.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2009, 07:32 AM
 
Location: Columbus, OH
857 posts, read 1,229,211 times
Reputation: 558
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickeldude View Post
Yes but that is a very idealistic way of looking at the world. When you are a realist and think of viable solutions to real world problems, simply banning abortions isn't going to stop people from having one, except now the fetus AND the mother are both in jeopardy now.
Keeping/making something legal just because people will do it either way is not a viable argument. But I do agree that keeping it legal will keep women safer.

Quote:
Just because you believe something to be wrong or immoral doesn't mean that it should be outlawed. There is the welfare of an entire country to consider, I guess I'm trying to say that you really need to look at the big picture.
Actually if you believe something to be wrong and immoral then you definitely should try to make it illegal, but if the majority is against you then all you can do it try to change people's minds.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2009, 07:39 AM
 
Location: Texas
14,969 posts, read 13,770,331 times
Reputation: 4539
Quote:
Originally Posted by ulnevrwalkalone View Post
Keeping/making something legal just because people will do it either way is not a viable argument. But I do agree that keeping it legal will keep women safer.
Life Without Roe: Making Predictions About Illegal Abortions — The Forerunner

"The report provides the basis for estimates that there were a mean of less than 100,000 illegal abortions annually in the years before Roe v. Wade, far fewer than the 1 million repeatedly claimed by abortion advocates.

“Today, there are 1.6 million abortions each year – 16 times as many as in the years before legalization,” McKnight noted"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2009, 08:03 AM
 
Location: Columbus, OH
857 posts, read 1,229,211 times
Reputation: 558
Quote:
Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok View Post
Life Without Roe: Making Predictions About Illegal Abortions — The Forerunner

"The report provides the basis for estimates that there were a mean of less than 100,000 illegal abortions annually in the years before Roe v. Wade, far fewer than the 1 million repeatedly claimed by abortion advocates.

“Today, there are 1.6 million abortions each year – 16 times as many as in the years before legalization,” McKnight noted"
While these stats would seem to favor your opinion, there are a couple ways I would argue that they are misleading. One, our culture as a whole has greatly changed since the early 70's and it would be hard to make a direct correlation between roe v wade and increased abortion. Secondly, when something is illegal its hard to get good statistics on how often it occurs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2009, 12:38 PM
 
1,245 posts, read 1,228,908 times
Reputation: 282
Quote:
Originally Posted by ulnevrwalkalone View Post
Keeping/making something legal just because people will do it either way is not a viable argument. But I do agree that keeping it legal will keep women safer.
No one said make it legal because people will do it anyways, some people actually want abortion to be legal even if you don't. Its about rights.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ulnevrwalkalone View Post
Actually if you believe something to be wrong and immoral then you definitely should try to make it illegal, but if the majority is against you then all you can do it try to change people's minds.
This is whats wrong with a lot of America, right and wrong aren't supposed to apply. Do you think that alcohol should be outlawed? Perhaps you'd want to outlaw being a muslim? A lot of people find these things, as well as many other things to be completely evil and immoral. Its not about right and wrong, its about fairness and personal rights. If we were to have a vote right now throughout the country deciding whether neo nazi rallies should be outlawed, it would get voted in by a landslide victory. But thats not how America works, its their right to be racist losers and we can't take that away from them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2009, 01:18 PM
 
Location: Columbus, OH
857 posts, read 1,229,211 times
Reputation: 558
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickeldude View Post

This is whats wrong with a lot of America, right and wrong aren't supposed to apply. Do you think that alcohol should be outlawed? Perhaps you'd want to outlaw being a muslim? A lot of people find these things, as well as many other things to be completely evil and immoral. Its not about right and wrong, its about fairness and personal rights. If we were to have a vote right now throughout the country deciding whether neo nazi rallies should be outlawed, it would get voted in by a landslide victory. But thats not how America works, its their right to be racist losers and we can't take that away from them.
How does this argument keep finding its way back to me?? Look, bottom line is its all about morality. You talk of our rights, but who decided on those? A bunch of guys who decided certain things were morally obligated to be granted to people and cannot be taken away. And if you had a national vote about the neo nazis I would bet you find a lot of people voting to allow it because they believe in the morality behind the right to assembly and free speech. ALL LAWS COME FROM MORALITY!!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2009, 01:47 PM
 
44,611 posts, read 43,144,135 times
Reputation: 14405
Quote:
Originally Posted by ulnevrwalkalone View Post
How does this argument keep finding its way back to me?? Look, bottom line is its all about morality. You talk of our rights, but who decided on those? A bunch of guys who decided certain things were morally obligated to be granted to people and cannot be taken away. And if you had a national vote about the neo nazis I would bet you find a lot of people voting to allow it because they believe in the morality behind the right to assembly and free speech. ALL LAWS COME FROM MORALITY!!!
Where is the morality in killing another human being for any reason other than self-defense?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2009, 01:56 PM
 
Location: Columbus, OH
857 posts, read 1,229,211 times
Reputation: 558
Quote:
Originally Posted by pirate_lafitte View Post
Where is the morality in killing another human being for any reason other than self-defense?


You mean MURDER??? Like the kind of things there are laws against??? The laws that were made based on people's morality???

Was this a point against my last point or a point against abortion in general?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top