• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should American adopt the right to Doctor Assisted Suicide?

Should Doctor assisted suicide be legal?

  • yes

    Votes: 42 70.0%
  • Depends on the regulation put in place and circumstances

    Votes: 11 18.3%
  • no

    Votes: 7 11.7%

  • Total voters
    60
You have a right to kill yourself, not to have others do killing for you.

Paying someone to kill a human in aggression is impermissible and any government that allows such a thing is backwards and barbaric.

There is no aggression so your strawman fails and negates the rest of your statement
 
Yes, yes, it is. Ending someone's life is aggression. You don't just kill someone and somehow not act aggressively. You're being nonsensical.

no its not, killing in general CAN be but it doesnt have to be aggression and in the context of this thread assisted suicide its definitely not aggression
 
Agreed. Totally not what the thread is about, but agreed wholeheartedly.

See I'm a libertarian, you may have heard of us, and we follow this thing called the non-aggression principle.

If that was true then you would support assisted suicide since there no aggression in it
 
They are they same thing. So whether or not you are hypothetically conceding is irrelevant.

You keep spinning your hyperbolic version of what Doctor assisted suicide is. It's Barbaric. It's murder. It's unethical.

But it's not working because you're wrong. There is nothing ill mannered or seedy about assisting someone who wants to die peacefully.

That fact remains despite by your protest.

100% correct by definition the aggression is not present and any "harm" is subjective. The whole strawman falls flat on its face because of those facts.
 
No it's not retarded not at all. What's retarded is your sad attempts at warping the meaning of things. Nice strawman though. Keep at that. Maybe you will convince someone to buy into your your hyperbolic ramblings.



Oh, but it is both a hyperbole and an exaggerate. Your line of reasoning fits both definitions to the t.
It doesn't violate anything. That has already be thoroughly explained to you. Reread previous post to you authored by quite a view different users - keep reading them until clicks.

Though I doubt it ever will. You are far to enthralled and stubborn to let go of you fake dictionary of definitions. It's why you don't understand the words - murder, aggression, violation, unethical and so on and so forth.

so many examples of this fact exist here, you posted the definition of aggression and nobody could make a real relation to it because just like you said its a made up strawman
ill never understand how the definition of a word can be provided then denied

there is no aggression in assisted suicide
 
If an innocent living human being, clearly not attacking you, is in your presence and you perform an act that kills them, then yeah, that is the initiation of force, lethal force. That is the very definition of aggression.

No thats not force or aggression in relation to assisted suicide. Saying otherwise is just dishonest
 
Uggggggggghhhhhhhhh.

1.)We're not talking about emotions.
2.)You cherry picked a definition, let's look at it.
3.)UNPROVOKED ATTACK
4.) MAKING ATTACKS, UNPROVOKED VIOLATION
5.) HOSTILE, INJURIOUS, DESTRUCTIVE
6.)So yeah. AKA, "the initiation of force."
7.)
Okay dude, I get it. You don't believe in the human right to life. You don't have to keep belaboring the point. Unfortunately, I still have to want your right to life protected even though you don't give a **** about it.

1/) then stop doing it
2.) yes please lets do that
3.) there is none in assisted suicide
4.) there is none in assisted suicide
5.) there is none in assisted suicide
6.) WHERE?! lol you just proved there isnt any of that. You own definition proves there is no aggression or initiation of force holy cow
7.) the right to life is totally intact, saying otherwise is another posted lie and strawman
 
so many examples of this fact exist here, you posted the definition of aggression and nobody could make a real relation to it because just like you said its a made up strawman
ill never understand how the definition of a word can be provided then denied

there is no aggression in assisted suicide

You'll need to find it in JD's Dictionary of Drama. It's a personal tome.
 
You'll need to find it in JD's Dictionary of Drama. It's a personal tome.

I have to agree. I don't see how there's aggression here in any way. Reading through this I'm simply not seeing any connection at all.
 
Back
Top Bottom