Depends on the regulation put in place and circumstances
Nancy Pelosi said: “We have to pass it, to find out what’s in it.” A Doctor called to a radio show & said: "That's the definition of a stool sample"
"Under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket," Barack Obama January 2008
ETA: Also, a useful info link: http://eol.law.dal.ca/?page_id=236
Last edited by Arcana XV; 02-08-15 at 08:15 AM.
"Yes, but are you a Protestant atheist or a Catholic atheist?".- Northern Irish joke
One person in physical and emotional agony - not feeling relief from the agony. Asking for death. Death being welcome. Do you think that the person would feel injured or harmed by death? Or perhaps welcome it with open arms?
But sure.....it is like falling off a bike.
OK, since we are going for silly analogies...try this one. A person happily goes in to get their ears pierced. The procedure goes off flawlessly. Is the person "injured"?
Same person does not want their ears pierced and is held down against their will . Is that person "injured"?
But who on Earth are strangers to tell someone that they must exist if they dont want to? How amazingly and disgustingly presumptuous is that to insist on and then to insist they dont know their own minds well enough so we wont allow anyone to help them? An insult to humans, period. Nothing but attempting to force their beliefs on others.
Just more sanctimonious semantic crap. If this is a person's well-thought out choice, the assistance they need...whether it just be a prescription or if it must be administered by a doctor or nurse....should be provided, legally.
No I didn't. Not even once. You have - because it is you whom believes that assisting a suicide is comparable to murder, but also in the same breath believe that it is ok to offer palliative care to someone committing suicide.You compared palliation with homicide.
I do. You don't. That much has been established.Anyone looking at the facts in a rational manner knows the difference between treating an uncomfortable symptom to give relief and deliberately killing someone.
You are beating your strawman to death. You can color assisted suicide as murder all you want, but it won't make it true. There is no malice aforethought. Sorry. Try again.So what, you're claiming that your theoretical Kevorkian-esque contract killer "doctor" is killing them on accident? This is a hired killing, it is intentional and premeditated
I don't care who you agree with or idolize. You are making an appeal to an authority. An authority that is not infallible. Decrees set forth by man are not mandated also by nature. We can oppose one's decision. One's subjective moral compass. One's perceptions of life, dignity, etc. We can even, wait for it, Oppose long ingrained Laws.This is the mission statement of the United States. Like most libertarians, I agree with it wholeheartedly.
Never said I could or would. Even still. You are continuing to make appeals to the word of man. Words written long ago. And those words are not, in any way, anything other than a collective and SUBJECTIVE echo of decisions from a time long ago.You can't sell yourself into slavery. You're not allowed to do so even if you want to. You can work for someone for no money if you choose to, but you cannot become their property and you will ALWAYS retain the liberty to stop doing so.
This has nothing to do with slavery, anyways. This has everything to do with an individuals right to choose when they want to die - and choose to seek medical assistance in doing so. Nothing about that violates any natural law. And natural law is very often subjective to begin with.
Says who? Some guy. Some joe shmoe? Some perfect ultimate being? My rebuttal remains the same. Your appeals to established laws does not somehow establish your argument as one that reflects the immutable characteristics of life. Plain and simple.You can give away your property, but you can't give away your right to own property.
What field of science defines any of that as an inescapable fact of life? Or are you again appealing to an opinion? Laws, decrees, established perceptions and understandings of things change. I've made this clear to you quite a few times now.You can't give someone else permission to kill you, or rather, even if you do, it doesn't matter, killing you would still be an act of aggression because they are initiating force against you.
Says who? Another person/ group of persons? Their decree is now being challenged. And the opposition is doing a bang up job at amending the established perception on assisted suicide, i.e when it is right to kill someone. Deal with those facts.Killing other humans is wrong unless it's necessary to do so in self-defense, to defend your own rights against the aggression of others.
There is nothing aggressive about doctor assisted suicide.that's your right to think that, and it's my right to be thankful I do not live anywhere near someone who is openly "morally flexible" on the principle of whether or not killing other humans in aggression is okay
Check the definition of the word "aggression" so that you can better understand because clearly you, currently, do not.
Aggression - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
: angry or violent behavior or feelings
: hostile action against another country, government, etc.I know you are human. That is why you are so prone to lapse into these hyperbolic nonsense rants that don't have an ounce of reason. It's because you are human that you are arguing not from logic but from your stubbornness against conceding in a debate you have already lost.since, you know, I happen to be a human and I kind of hope other people will not kill me.
And yet no one is doing that. That is your straw man. You are coloring the oppositions argument as murder because that is an easier argument to address than actually addressing the actual argument. Which is not murder or "needless killing" but compassion and mercy granted to ill and suffering individuals who want out.As a rule, I'm wary of those who promote needless killing.
If you're killing someone, it is the same thing. Literally. You will be charged with murder.You have - because it is you whom believes that assisting a suicide is comparable to murder
Yes, if someone is refusing food and fluids in an effort to hasten their own death but they do request palliation of any symptoms of discomfort, there is nothing wrong whatsoever with providing palliation.but also in the same breath believe that it is ok to offer palliative care to someone committing suicide.
You don't think there is a difference. So no, what you just said makes zero sense.I do. You don't. That much has been established.
What's the point in trying again? I successfully made my point the first time. There's nothing more to say. You refuse to understand and you're stamping your feet, but that won't change anything, as you haven't offered a single bit of reasoning to back up your statement.You are beating your strawman to death. You can color assisted suicide as murder all you want, but it won't make it true. There is no malice aforethought. Sorry. Try again.
You say there's no malice aforethought. To rebut this falsehood, I provided the definition of malice aforethought. I demonstrated how it is impossible that the guy you pay to kill you would not be deliberately and intentionally killing you, with premeditation. You still claim that there is no malice aforethought, appropriate of nothing in reality or the definition of the legal term.
What you're saying is absolutely crazy. Please explain how you intentionally kill someone without malice aforethought.
Obviously not. Unfortunately, as an American I have to count on my fellow Americans to hold our government accountable and make sure it upholds our human rights. You actually want the government to spit on them.I don't care who you agree with or idolize. You are making an appeal to an authority. An authority that is not infallible. Decrees set forth by man are not mandated also by nature. We can oppose one's decision. One's subjective moral compass. One's perceptions of life, dignity, etc.
"May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget you were my countrymen."
(That was some "old archaic" dude who said that, so you probably don't care)
Last edited by JayDubya; 02-08-15 at 02:49 PM.