ForzaDundee Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 60 for vs 2 against. Demographic of P&B is very ahead of the general population on most issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 If I want to die, that is my right. The state are forcing me to live despite my suffering both physical and mental is nothing more than torture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambomo Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 If I want to die, that is my right. The state are forcing me to live despite my suffering both physical and mental is nothing more than torture. I don't disagree - it should the decision of the ill person. I just a worry that it becomes, as many things do, the start of a slippery slope. To start with they have to administer the medicine themselves. How long before the protest of it being unfair on those who are unable? Or you have to have less than 6 months to live but how long before it's in court when people with a year to go etc is argued as being just as bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lisa Cuddy Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 I don't disagree - it should the decision of the ill person. I just a worry that it becomes, as many things do, the start of a slippery slope. To start with they have to administer the medicine themselves. How long before the protest of it being unfair on those who are unable? Or you have to have less than 6 months to live but how long before it's in court when people with a year to go etc is argued as being just as bad. No, you're missing the point. We're talking about assisted suicide, not suicide. The whole point of it being assisted is that they need help to do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludo*1 Posted July 18, 2014 Author Share Posted July 18, 2014 What are people's thoughts on a legal form of suicide before the suffering party reaches the stage of intolerable pain or whatever? I'm thinking along the lines of someone who has been diagnosed with something such as Motor Neurone Disease or the like who wishes to end their life before the point where every day challenges become a struggle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 It's a tough one and I can definately see both sides. There is no other side. That's all made up shite to make you feel better about croaking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hillonearth Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 What are people's thoughts on a legal form of suicide before the suffering party reaches the stage of intolerable pain or whatever? I'm thinking along the lines of someone who has been diagnosed with something such as Motor Neurone Disease or the like who wishes to end their life before the point where every day challenges become a struggle. Bottom line is people should be free to choose how they live their lives, or end them. If somebody knows they're checking out, the choice should be theirs whether they want to wait till the suffering becomes intolerable or quit while they're ahead as it were while they've still got some quality of life. It's the biggest personal decision anyone could ever make, and it should be theirs and theirs alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon EF Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 I don't disagree - it should the decision of the ill person. I just a worry that it becomes, as many things do, the start of a slippery slope. To start with they have to administer the medicine themselves. How long before the protest of it being unfair on those who are unable? Or you have to have less than 6 months to live but how long before it's in court when people with a year to go etc is argued as being just as bad. The 'slippery slope' argument is certainly used a lot. It's very rarely a good one either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bing (2) Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 Against it in principle. Takes the skill away from your deadpool picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bing (2) Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 What are people's thoughts on a legal form of suicide before the suffering party reaches the stage of intolerable pain or whatever? I'm thinking along the lines of someone who has been diagnosed with something such as Motor Neurone Disease or the like who wishes to end their life before the point where every day challenges become a struggle. ? Well, they are not going to be charged over it in that scenario. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludo*1 Posted July 18, 2014 Author Share Posted July 18, 2014 Bing (2), on 18 Jul 2014 - 21:12, said:? Well, they are not going to be charged over it in that scenario. You're missing what the point was in the post. If it fails they are, but again that wasn't the point of my post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambomo Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 The 'slippery slope' argument is certainly used a lot. It's very rarely a good one either. Once sometime becomes acceptable then the next logical thing becomes acceptable and so on. Sometimes it's better not to start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bing (2) Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 You're missing what the point was in the post. If it fails they are, but again that wasn't the point of my post. Yet you were on about before life was a struggle. If they can't hook up a noose then, frankly, tough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon EF Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 Once sometime becomes acceptable then the next logical thing becomes acceptable and so on. Sometimes it's better not to start. Things only become acceptable when we judge them to be acceptable. The age of consent for gay sex was lowered to 16 a few years ago, that doesn't mean that, now everyone accepts that was an acceptable decision, it's be lowered to 12 any time soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludo*1 Posted July 19, 2014 Author Share Posted July 19, 2014 Bing (2), on 18 Jul 2014 - 21:33, said: Yet you were on about before life was a struggle. If they can't hook up a noose then, frankly, tough. 'Hook(ing) up a noose' can be extremely painful death if not done correctly, no-one deserves to die a death that will in one way or another put the victim and the victim's family through a great deal of anguish, much more than another easing to death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 I'll be taking a few with me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambomo Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Things only become acceptable when we judge them to be acceptable. The age of consent for gay sex was lowered to 16 a few years ago, that doesn't mean that, now everyone accepts that was an acceptable decision, it's be lowered to 12 any time soon. Many years back it was illegal to be homosexual and you went to jail. I this instance it's a good thing but you can still see a path of gradually changing opinions and permissions over time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon EF Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Many years back it was illegal to be homosexual and you went to jail. I this instance it's a good thing but you can still see a path of gradually changing opinions and permissions over time. Eh, yes. But we've never started to make bad or unacceptable decisions simply because 'that;s the way it's heading'. You're making the case for change to happen gradually, which is obvious. The 'slippery slope' is about eventually ending up at an extreme simply because we've taken a few steps in a particular direction. That's very different. If everyone listened to the slippery slope argument, we'd probably still be living in the dark ages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bing (2) Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Eh, yes. But we've never started to make bad or unacceptable decisions simply because 'that;s the way it's heading'. You're making the case for change to happen gradually, which is obvious. The 'slippery slope' is about eventually ending up at an extreme simply because we've taken a few steps in a particular direction. That's very different. If everyone listened to the slippery slope argument, we'd probably still be living in the dark ages. I'm sure assisted death was allowed in the Dark Ages,.............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 I'm sure assisted death was allowed in the Dark Ages,.............. They also inflicted excruciating pain first, so not much change, really... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.