Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Yes, what has it got to do with a random stranger, close family I guess , of cause if they really want to kill themselves they will , this way it would be less stressful. Forcing your view on someone else is what is sick.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

The fallacy that personal choice is the ultimate good is dangerous. We do not live in an atomised non-society in which any individual can make a choice about anything without that having any implications for anyone else. We therefore have laws which regulate behaviour in ordered society. And, in one way or another, every law forces a view on those individuals who may wish they were not bound by that law, but are bound by it all the same. This is not sick. To claim it is, is bizarre.

One person’s freedom to choose to die will now come at the cost of creating a mechanism that can - and will - work against those whose palliative care is a burden on family and the State and who will feel a persistent, gentle pressure to make themselves scarce. For me, one person’s right to choose is not worth someone else feeling obliged to kill themselves. Not at all.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Errr... what ? :erm:

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

So if your daughter said to you that she wanted to kill herself, You wouldn’t urge her to explore any avenue to avoid that conclusion?

And if that person has no family, they shouldn’t have “someone” put that outlet to them?

---------- Post added at 20:40 ---------- Previous post was at 20:36 ----------

Box office.

How is Elvis?

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

:tu:

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Approximately half of people believe in life after death, with many having seen or heard from people that were so called 'dead'.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Not a fact, or proof of anything.

There’s also no such thing as “so called dead”, I believe the state is binary in nature.

But I fear we’re drifting into philosophical territory.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Belief is not a fact.
Anyone can say they "heard from people that were so called 'dead'".

If there were any actual real evidence, it would be headline news.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

I use the term 'so called dead' because the state of death doesn't exist.

---------- Post added at 16:41 ---------- Previous post was at 16:35 ----------

It doesn't matter whether people believe in it or not, the process is just the same.

To those who don't believe (I can understand this if they haven't had proof personally) all I say is to bear it in mind. That way, when your time comes and you 'wake up dead', it won't be as surprising, confusing or even frightening.

It's not unknown for some people not to know that they've 'died'. They can still see, hear, think etc and so initially it doesn't occur to them that this change has happened.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Worldwide I suspect that actually a lot more than half of people believe in life after death. Humanism is largely a Western idea, and isn’t universally popular here either.

Nonetheless, in some of your later posts on this I think you’ve gone a bit overboard. None of the major world religions are anything like so didactic about the precise mechanism by which someone passes from this life to the next. I’m a Christian minister, I lead services every Sunday and I take funerals several times every year, yet I would never try to tell anyone how things happen with such detail.

Your problem is you are trying to make scientific-sounding pronouncements as if they have been, or could be, scientifically verified. That is impossible - the scientific method is, by design, limited to measurable, repeatable interactions within the material universe.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

how exactly do you know this?

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Michael Aspel's Strange but True?

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

That is not the same as having the right in the end ( sorry for the pun) to choose for yourself. In my case I have a gun :shocked:

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

you’re going to have to qualify that……….unless you’re a Hindu.


This is next level batshit

I don’t know where to start.

“Wake up dead”? Do you know many awoken dead people? That have explained this to you?

---------- Post added at 20:06 ---------- Previous post was at 19:53 ----------

Yes a bottle of whiskey and a gun…………

Instead of forcing people to drink a bottle of whiskey and blow their brains out, Can’t we give them a more less stressful way out, in a clinic?


My point being, we should not, as a society, be allowing depressed, troubled, or other issue, healthy adult wishing to think they have no value, nothing to offer to the world, or to themselves, and wanting to end it. They need to be counselled.

Assisted suicide should, in general, only be considered for terminally ill were you are going to deteriorate beyond the state of the person you are, and can no longer function as you. A clumsy definition but. I.e. MND, Alzheimer’s (difficult one to sort)

Or were the illness is too painful to continue with or leaves you with no quality of life

There are definitions we can work on.

But healthy people should be allowed to be euthanised

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

:erm: