Should people have a choice to live or to die? (illegal, soldiers)
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.
People are forced to live. Did you notice that? When you don't want to anymore, you have to sneak and hide and find ways to make your choice so that others wouldn't notice.
Because if they notice, they won't give you a choice. They will make you do what THEY want done. If you wanted to exit, and someone noticed, they would run to your rescue and "save" you no matter what. So you get screwed, ending up in the same place where you were before. And they feel all noble and good for "saving" you.
But in reality, they just forced you to do something you don't want to do. They forced their good intentions on you. They wanted you to be like they want instead of like you want. They don't care about how much pain you're in. They just care about their belief and that it makes them feel good "to save" someone.
I would say that's selfish.
Some people do exit. And others call them selfish. They say: well, you left others to be missing you, to be in pain and suffering because of missing you. Ok. But what about this person's suffering? What about the fact that it was too much? Isn't it selfish of the others to demand that he hang on no matter what?
Who is selfish?
Ultimately, people care about no pain to themselves. Those who exit want to end the pain. Those who prevent the exit want to make sure they themselves don't have the pain (of missing that person).
So is it really noble to "save" someone like this? Or is it selfish?
Like someone said: people are more compassionate to animals. They "put them down" when they're in pain. But when people are in pain, then: "you just have to hang on, it's noble to suffer, no matter what".
Or some loved ones at the bed of someone dying: please don't leave me.... They are just thinking of themselves. It's not noble at all to beg your loved one to not leave you. It's selfish. The loving thing to do for you would be to tell them to go, to be at peace, to find rest...
People should have a choice. If they want to stick around, they should be allowed to. If they don't, they should be allowed to exit.
Suicide is a long-term solution to what are all but inevitably short-term problems, hence it is almost always a bad idea. And as a member of various networks, the same extra-personal responsibilities and obligations that keep you from burning these other people with lit cigarettes imply an obligation and responsibility to preserve them as well from the probably worse and certainly more enduring pain of your self-inflicted death. The exceptions of course are the obvious case of a choice between death and horrible suffering. Most people would make that distinction.
Suicide is a long-term solution to what are all but inevitably short-term problems, hence it is almost always a bad idea. And as a member of various networks, the same extra-personal responsibilities and obligations that keep you from burning these other people with lit cigarettes imply an obligation and responsibility to preserve them as well from the probably worse and certainly more enduring pain of your self-inflicted death. The exceptions of course are the obvious case of a choice between death and horrible suffering. Most people would make that distinction.
If you've ever suffered with long term mental illness, suicide is most certainly not a permanent solution to a so-called temporary problem. Just because you cannot see someone's pain, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Some people simply cannot live fulfilling lives and either end up destitute, homeless or incarcerated when they have no support network to turn to. It is very judgmental of people to dismiss such pain, just because it's not tangible.
Euthanasia should be legal and it should be administered painlessly to those who would benefit from it and cannot be cured and do not wish to be treated.
When we have the ability to cure mental illnesses, take care of the poor with dignity then maybe I'll get back to you with a different answer.
Absolutely they should have the right to choose, as ultimately all human beings are endowed with the right to self-determination. There is no overarching reason that the state should be allowed to interfere with the ability to determine whether or not to commit suicide, so long as it remains private and no external parties are physically harmed. That doesn't mean we shouldn't work on outreach to help those struggling with mental health problems; on the contrary, it's critical that awareness, education and therapy be available and viable options. Still, it is ultimately the right of the individual to do what he or she wishes with his or her body.
Criminalizing suicide is a big issue I have with society. For myself, suicide has always been a positive force - because the choice exists, I am more likely to keep going. I believe we should have a choice whether to live or die, and the "could haves" and possibilities any human being might have brought to the table if they choose not to live should not be a reason for keeping them alive. Suicide is selfish, but so is demanding that people stay here, consciously walking about hating life, themselves and being miserable, perhaps only hanging on for fear of some godlike retribution or threat of hell.
It's not fair to demand someone to stay alive anymore than it is to ask them to stay in an abusive relationship. If things get too tough, and one is being hurt beyond repair, the relationship should be ended. In the case of life there is only one other partner - death.
I hold human life in high regard, but I did not choose to be here and so philosophically I believe the act of forcing a zygote to come forth as a viable human being is an act of selfishness. For those who did not ask for this life, and who do not wish to live it...who are we to judge if they chose to stop what they were originally forced to endure.
People do have a choice. Jump from a bridge, blow your brains out with a gun, take a bunch of pills (your choice), run headlong into a brick wall going as fast as your car will take you (minus seat belts of course), take a trip to Irag and in the middle of the street start singing onward Christian soldiers, you have choices.
You can do all of those things without asking anyone, needing help from anyone or even telling anyone before you decide to off yourself.
The question the OP asked really isn't a good one because you do have a choice. Others might not like it, the government can say it is illegal but in the end, if you don't tell anyone and kill yourself, who can stop you? No one.
The problem through, and the real issue is that people who say they want a choice also want to tell everyone about it first and often engage someone else to help them so that their death is peaceful, clean and serene. Well, death is anything but those things.
If one wants to die, no one can stop you. It is a lie to yourself and everyone else to say there is no choice. What you mean is that the choice you have isn't the one you happen to like because taking your own life isn't really part of the plan, you want others to know about it and give their blessing.
There are many many places where the cliffs are so high and the fall so long that survival is as improbable as it gets. The deal though, is that YOU have to be active in your own death and that is the real issue, you want none of that, best to have some sanitary way to go out where you think it is just a "passing" on. Well, on trash day, jump into a big ziplock that is inside the recycle canister and wait for the truck. No one will know, you'll be one with the earth at some point and you'll be dead.
Absolutely they should have the right to choose, as ultimately all human beings are endowed with the right to self-determination.
Too much Ayn Rand and associated gobbledygook. Human beings do not have an unfettered right to self-determination, as you yourself would ultimately argue. Ordered liberty demands that all your rights be limited in degrees by the rights, needs, and wants of those around you. Can you name any condition whereunder one might justifiably inflict significant pain and suffering on others solely on the basis of having appointed oneself as the sole and exclusive judge of whether or not to do so? I pretty much don't think you can.
Perhaps and perhaps not, but your post squarely put it into that category. Suffering, suffering, and more suffering. Few people are actually in favor of that.
My point is that few people who have never suffered from any form of mental illness or even physical deformity can understand that type of suffering. That's why you get all this find god, get therapy or take pills nonsense. The same people who either judge or diminish the suffering are also the same people to have a problem with those who are unable to function or work easily becoming a drain on the system. Many don't have any kind of support network in this country.
As for the poster who implied how easy it would be to just blow your brains out or jump off a cliff, 1) there's nothing "easy" about those things and 2) why not allow such individuals to die painlessly and humanely instead of resorting to gruesome methods that will undoubtedly affect passers by?
I understand both sides of the argument. Someone we know killed himself a week after we saw him last. He left behind a wife with pancreatic cancer and two teenage children. It's been 4 months now and I'm still trying to sort out my feelings about it. I understand his pain, I saw it and felt it the last time I saw him. I understand how selfish it was to leave his wife and children behind when they needed him most. There is no easy answer except the one he took when he chose to end his life. The rest of us have no choice but to put one foot in front of the other and move on.
People are forced to live. Did you notice that? When you don't want to anymore, you have to sneak and hide and find ways to make your choice so that others wouldn't notice.
Because if they notice, they won't give you a choice. They will make you do what THEY want done. If you wanted to exit, and someone noticed, they would run to your rescue and "save" you no matter what. So you get screwed, ending up in the same place where you were before. And they feel all noble and good for "saving" you.
But in reality, they just forced you to do something you don't want to do. They forced their good intentions on you. They wanted you to be like they want instead of like you want. They don't care about how much pain you're in. They just care about their belief and that it makes them feel good "to save" someone.
I would say that's selfish.
Some people do exit. And others call them selfish. They say: well, you left others to be missing you, to be in pain and suffering because of missing you. Ok. But what about this person's suffering? What about the fact that it was too much? Isn't it selfish of the others to demand that he hang on no matter what?
Who is selfish?
Ultimately, people care about no pain to themselves. Those who exit want to end the pain. Those who prevent the exit want to make sure they themselves don't have the pain (of missing that person).
So is it really noble to "save" someone like this? Or is it selfish?
Like someone said: people are more compassionate to animals. They "put them down" when they're in pain. But when people are in pain, then: "you just have to hang on, it's noble to suffer, no matter what".
Or some loved ones at the bed of someone dying: please don't leave me.... They are just thinking of themselves. It's not noble at all to beg your loved one to not leave you. It's selfish. The loving thing to do for you would be to tell them to go, to be at peace, to find rest...
People should have a choice. If they want to stick around, they should be allowed to. If they don't, they should be allowed to exit.
No, LoveWisdom, I didn't notice that...Anyone can die if they want and no one can stop them. It's the people who feel it should be made legal to give someone else the right to kill, that seem to have a problem with it...I think the people who won't do it themselves, and then cry the blues because some people are against legalized murder (call it euthanasia if you want) are the selfish ones. If euthanasia is allowed , it's a given that we'll have people who really didn't want to die being put to death.(collateral damage)...An example of extreme collateral damage would be the 40% of death row inmates who (when dna was finally put to use) were found to be innocent...I feel if you want to die then it's up to YOU to find a friend or relative who can help you (if needed), but never, never, never a doctor who's taken an oath to preserve life....
People DO have a choice, and if they want to stick around they can, and if they don't..they can exit.
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.
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.
