Voluntary euthanasia

Post Reply New Topic

Do you support or oppose voluntary euthanasia? Why or why not?

Lately I have come to support voluntary euthanasia, partly as a result of long personal suffering, in the following form: If any person requests euthanasia for himself or herself, that person's background, character, and recent history will be examined to ensure that such a request is not being abused (say, after hurting someone), and, if so, a one-month waiting period will first be held, allowing the requester to live normally, after which he or she may receive a painless, euthanizing injection at any time within the following two months.

The purpose of such a law would be to eliminate the suffering that results from sexual selection and various painful conditions, in a manner that does not allow the genes giving rise to such conditions to be propogated for the unfair benefit of doctors and psychiatrists. One step toward this goal for our nation will be to respect the feelings of the unattractive, rather than ridiculing them or forcing them to live in needless pain, and to abandon the Christian doctrines that contribute to such pain.

For people unable to make requests for euthanasia (for instance, in being unable to speak), it is my strong and heartfelt conviction that if there is any possibiliy of unbearable suffering, including instances in which further expressions of suffering are impaired (say, by being placed involuntarily in a wheelchair), we euthanize them anyway, to prevent that dreadful sadist society whose victims would be unable to express how they feel in words.

I was going to write a post about this. I don't really have time today to writ in detail.

But yes I do. I support exit international's view and also more than that.

i dont.

id rather they kill themselves than drag someone along.

i would also like criminals to tie their own noose.

Voluntary euthanasia will not necessarily be provided to people who might appear to be abusing the request. This means you wouldn't be able to commit a crime and then get away with it by euthanizing yourself, as the background check would discover your crime.

However, you do raise an important issue relating to unsolved crimes, which I will consider. Hopefully, as we gain an insight into criminal psychology (surely, envy of a more fortunate lifestyle contributes!) we will decide whether voluntary euthanasia, in conjunction with certain ideals of society, will be able to prevent crime altogether. But for goodness' sake, there needs to be a solution!

Anyway, I'll think about it.

(Edit: Deleted a few words)

Sounds like a good idea - note that suicide can be incredibly difficult if you don't have access to a gun or strong narcotics. And there's always the chance you could wind up in a lot worse shape than before from a failed attempt.

I believe its wrong. Suicide is a sin and never really solves anything. God wants us to live until he wants us home.

Plus think of loved ones left behind how they would feel.

Surely you could argue the classic free-will defence against the 'sin' of suicide? It's not Gods' choice to make, so why prolong your agony?
I'm for euthanasia for very sick people (i.e. the terminally ill) in order to make their end quick and painless, instead of dragging it out for months at a time in a fetid hospital bed. But I don't know what the OP means by 'unattractive'. Are you saying that uglys should be able to kill themselves?

Just as a side remark, don't you think God would find a fairer method of revelation -- say, appearing in the sky every so often, or as a pattern in the stars, or by living and perform miracles on Earth -- than presenting us with an image of a man nailed to a cross?

What does the cross prove? What does the Bible prove? Among all the religions in the world, what makes Christianity the 'correct' religion? How could I not argue something similar from a fragment of someone else's religion?

I sometimes get the feeling that Christians are not merely perpetuating lies by accident but genuinely bullying the less attractive. My up-and-coming essay will show you how that could have been done.

In response to oscuria: If we eliminate some of the violence-promoting schemes in our society (deceptive marketing, bullying, and so on), we might witness a crime reduction. I'll continue to think about it. We might also need to reassure everyone that they are loved and cared for (something Jim Benton isn't doing too well), and in such a loving society we may witness crime rates drop as well.

In response to just_ben: Yes, I'm beginning to think that less attractive people should be allowed to commit suicide. If it's just that painful not to have a girlfriend (and yes, I'm a little mad about this), and they make it that complicated for us, then instead of having our hearts explode in nightmares we may euthanize ourselves.

We just need to get it through to people what sexual selection is about. We are not a savage species of torturers, nor should we become one. Shame on all of you who want to victimize and ridicule the less attractive -- and that would include God, if God existed.

How is volunteering for the stiffest punishment allowable by law "getting away with a crime"? If anything, it is overpunishing yourself for a crime.

Honestly, I don't see how this system can be abused in a manner that is easily detectable, as what the suicide could most easily be abused for is to psychologically torment someone, and those things are harder to pick up upon.

That said, I am up for legal anything. I mean, one does not need to be legal to commit suicide as it stands.

So kill them when they can't talk to you anymore? or am i reading this wrong.

I support voluntary youth in asia


Sorry, had to be done. I've been wanting to unload that joke for a long, long time.

About criminal abuse of voluntary euthanasia:

What if you administered a lie detector test to people whose backgrounds indicated that they might be criminals?

Just how many criminal cases go unsolved? What fraction of them, do you think?

Lie detectors aren't reliable.

As usual the focus is on this smokescreen 'moral' objection rather the actual subject. I will get back to the real morality, based on the facts rather than the emotional nonsense.

First of all we are living longer and longer on the one hand; on the other hand our overall health isn't brilliant even in the west.

Some older people are very healthy, but most old people are not, but we are able to keep them alive even though they may be in pain, or suffer from dementia among other things.

We insist that our loved ones stay alive through this, yet consider it 'selfish' is someone wants to end their life. BS

Why wait till someone doesn't know who they are, and have not control, if they don't want it? What possible reason to do this? Why not allow them to die in dignity?

There is no need for lie detector.

Why would you assume that it would be more open to abuse? You mean more than it currently is when it is underground?

We are talking about people who what to end their life in dignity and want to participate in that process as much as possible.

Take Harold Shipman. The guy used deception to administer morphine. Morphine is not used to put down animals, nor is it used as lethal injection. ODing on heroin is not a fun thing.

This guy was able to operate without, and he would be able to operate after. It makes no difference, the number of people he killed was limited only by the availability of potential victims, his practice, and how much time he had. He was about taking away the life (as well as watching someone slowly die apparently). Consent was not in his modus operandi. Morphine is connected to his mother, who he used to administer it to as a kid.

Last edited by 0_equals_true on 29 May 2009, 12:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.