Euthanasia

[MysteryClock]

I'm for it. How can you argue against it?

[Low-Budget-Superhero]

At 6/5/01 05:58 AM, super_ape wrote: I'm for it. How can you argue against it?

Is there any one sane to preform it? Do you really think Kevorikian is coherent?

[Raptorman]

Youth in Asia. Well I'm all for youth everywhere, especially if it is far from me.

[Jonny-Alpha]

At 6/5/01 05:58 AM, super_ape wrote: I'm for it. How can you argue against it?

Posting a post to say I agree may seem pointless. But who has the right to tell someone that they must continue suffering because the government say so?

[Ahimsa138]

At 6/5/01 05:14 PM, Jonny_Alpha wrote:

At 6/5/01 05:58 AM, super_ape wrote: I'm for it. How can you argue against it?

Posting a post to say I agree may seem pointless. But who has the right to tell someone that they must continue suffering because the government say so?

The government really does seem to overstep it's boundaries when it comes to these things. Whether it's morally right or wrong can never be decided on, so how can we decide the legality of it.

[HornedReaper]

At 6/5/01 05:58 AM, super_ape wrote: I'm for it. How can you argue against it?

If the parents want it, and the patient is suffering, or in a "vegtable state" i'd say its just fine.(this is my first post on the Political board by the way, woop de fucking do)

[fuck-fu]

I am for it but it needs to be regulated more strictly. EI. Somebody has a stroke and is unable to speak and somebody else deicdes for them... now lets say that person was the inheritor and the person actually wasn't in that much pain but the inheritor insisted...then you would have a problem

[Serendipity]

At 6/5/01 11:28 AM, GameboyCC wrote:

At 6/5/01 05:58 AM, super_ape wrote: I'm for it. How can you argue against it?

Is there any one sane to preform it? Do you really think Kevorikian is coherent?

That's not far from the truth. Most euthanasia activists have more extreme views on the matter. Peter Zinger's "Rethinking Our Ethics" starts off with a rational view of euthanasia. The scenario includes two infants. Both perfectly healthy, except one needs a heart transplant, and the other has been born without a brain. The only thing that exists is a brain stem, meaning there is no concious and the infant shall not grow. The idea is simple. Rather than have both infants die, save one by taking the life of the infant that cannot be saved. (I doubt one would find a mother willing to cut her short time with her child, even shorter.)

This makes sense, but the further you read into Peter Zinger's philosophies (and Kevorkian's) they become more and more disturbing. Kevorkian wants to offer the basic right to suicide, whether there is an ailment or not. Peter Zinger believes that the first 30 days in an infant's life is without conciousness. Thus, parents should be allowed 30 days to terminate the child.

Such extremes are too much for me comprehend, as I'm sure many would agree.

Rights can easily turn into obligations. I imagine many in the disability community have concerns that expanding our rights to euthanasia will later cause intolerance for those with disabilities. It may become an issue of "Dying is better than being disabled." and that sends an eerie message.

[Pantomime-Horse]

At 6/5/01 05:58 AM, super_ape wrote: I'm for it. How can you argue against it?

I'm a stronge believer in Euthanasia & so are my parents, Animals have the right to die instead of suffereing, why shouldn't we.

There is no sense in keeping a brain dead person alive, The brain is the life, if the Brain is dead necrosis instantley sets in & the brain will never live again, for all intents & purpouses that person is already dead.

A terminally ill person, someone who is in great pain or the elderly should have the right to die if they so choose, Right To Life means nothing without "Right to quality of life" & "Right to freedom of life".

[wdfcverfgtghm]

At 6/5/01 05:58 AM, super_ape wrote: I'm for it. How can you argue against it?

I'm for it, If you want to, then that's your view, but... let's think about what's going to happen if people depend on you for support. That needs to be sorted out. I don't pretend to have any soulutions but I'd propose debate about that subject. AS well as if the government has the right to subject you to couciling, therapy etc... before taking your own life.