Euthanasia

[sidecar bob]

That was Robert Taylors deal Maha. And many paid the $100+ per hour for his parts fitting, fukin red neck that he is

Meds bro, meds.

[Ulsterkiwi]

We'll I'm glad we've finally established that you're an irrational fuckwit.

I think your post even surpasses anything that Ed could come up with.

why do you insist on devaluing any argument or case you have by descending into mindless name calling of those who express an opinion or take a position other than your own? You asked for the man's position and he provided it. Rather than engage in actual debate you dismiss the very thing you sought. That is senseless!

You present this social conundrum as being simple to solve. Entire nations have struggled with this question long before you began to think about it and none have yet come up with a flawless system to allow those with genuine desire to control how they meet their end, while still protecting the vulnerable.
You have had a personal experience which has clearly influenced your thinking and attitudes, understandably so, and noone has the right to question or detract the validity of your experience or the resulting mindset which has developed from it. Why should anyone else expect less, just because their attitude does not align with yours?

[Katman]

why do you insist on devaluing any argument or case you have by descending into mindless name calling of those who express an opinion or take a position other than your own? You asked for the man's position and he provided it. Rather than engage in actual debate you dismiss the very thing you sought. That is senseless!

No, what is senseless is introducing one's aversion to gay marriage and anecdotes of people being arrested for sitting on the bus with their legs apart, into a discussion on euthanasia.

[Ulsterkiwi]

Did you miss my post above?

clearly.....

[RDJ]

We'll I'm glad we've finally established that you're an irrational fuckwit. I think your post even surpasses anything that Ed could come up with.

Yeah, Katman - but every now and then you could, you know, try to debate the facts instead of trotting out the tired old ad hominem fuckwitschtick? The relevance of the analogies is the desire of your ilk to enforce your beliefs on other people who then you demand implement them. Or else. And the 'Or Else' enforced by Government Diktat.

Item 1: A bakery owner in Oregon broke down in tears while discussing the fallout of her and her husband’s decision not to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex couple on the basis of their Christian beliefs. Earlier this year, the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries found “substantial evidence” that Aaron and Melissa Klein, owners of Sweet Cakes by Melissa, discriminated against the lesbian couple. Oregon bakery owners face a $150,000 discrimination fine for not baking a wedding cake for lesbians. They now face a fine in excess of $150,000. Aaron said the fee would “definitely” be enough to bankrupt the couple and their five children.

Item 2: Police officers arrested two Latino men on the charge of 'manspreading' on the subway, presumably because they were taking up more than one seat and therefore inconveniencing other riders, according to the report. The term "manspreading" was coined by internet users to describe men taking up more than one public transport seat, by sitting with their knees wide open.

Irrational? To quote Inigo Montoya "I do not think that word means what you think it means."

[Katman]

Item 1: A bakery owner in Oregon broke down in tears while discussing the fallout of her and her husband’s decision not to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex couple on the basis of their Christian beliefs. Earlier this year, the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries found “substantial evidence” that Aaron and Melissa Klein, owners of Sweet Cakes by Melissa, discriminated against the lesbian couple. Oregon bakery owners face a $150,000 discrimination fine for not baking a wedding cake for lesbians. They now face a fine in excess of $150,000. Aaron said the fee would “definitely” be enough to bankrupt the couple and their five children.

Item 2: First people arrested for 'manspreading' on New York subway. Two men were arrested for "manspreading" and taking up too much room on the New York City subway, documents have revealed. The Police Reform Organising Project (PROP) collected 117 vignettes of citizens' interactions with police for a report on the New York Police Department's attitudes to race and class. "Police officers had arrested two Latino men on the charge of 'manspreading' on the subway, presumably because they were taking up more than one seat and therefore inconveniencing other riders," according to the report. The term "manspreading" was coined by internet users to describe men taking up more than one public transport seat, by sitting with their knees wide open.

Neither really have any connection to the matter of euthanasia though, do they?

I'd suggest it's your inability to discuss the matter rationally that's the problem here.

[Ulsterkiwi]

No, what is senseless is introducing ones aversion to gay marriage and anecdotes of people being arrested for sitting on the bus with their legs apart, into a discussion on euthanasia.

I am not aware of anything to do with people being arrested for sitting on a bus like that so cannot comment.

I did not however see a view expressed which demonstrated aversion to gay marriage. What I read was someone concerned that social engineering in today's society is not so different to what it has ever been; anyone who makes a stand which does not align with the zeitgeist of the time is attacked. Its not that long ago individuals were attacked for saying gay people should not be discriminated against.
In the case of the bakery, legal action was taken against a business which refused to undertake a contract on a point of principle. An analagous situation might be taking a jewish catering business to court because they declined to make bacon sandwiches.

The point is you asked what the problem with euthanasia is in your OP. Subsequently you asked for the opinion of someone you identified as a medical practitioner. He recounted why there is difficulty for doctors and provided comparisons to other social questions, a common and quite acceptable debating technique. You got what you wanted, an answer to the question you asked, but decided to call the man an irrational fuckwit??????

Perhaps I am expecting too much that an invitation to debate is just that.

[RDJ]

Neither really have any connection to the matter of euthanasia though, do they?

I'd suggest it's your inability to discuss the matter rationally that's the problem here.

Mmmkay. I was trying to illustrate the issue of enforcing your beliefs on those who don't share them but - yeah, WOMBAT.*

(* a WOMBAT mod on my bikes is one I did full of hope but ended up being a Waste Of Money, Brains And Time :-) )

[Katman]

Mmmkay. I was trying to illustrate the issue of enforcing your beliefs on those who don't share them but - yeah, WOMBAT.

If you go back and read the thread carefully you'll see I'm not trying to 'enforce my beliefs on those who don't share them'.

I'm trying to understand why some people are so vehemently against the concept of euthanasia for terminally ill people.

You're just not doing a very good job of explaining your reasoning.

(At least your acronyms are better than Maha's though).

[Banditbandit]

Is wanking into a tissue or any other disposable receptacle murder? All those sperms killed. They are after all alive.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/0...n_7442436.html

Pain and suffering are givens in this world and as humans we like to feel we are in control of our lives and destinies, including over pain and suffering.

I can't help but wonder how many of those who want the right to have someone assist them with death due to terminal illness are truly prepared to do the deed themselves while they're still mentally and physically able to do so. It's like they want the 'benefit' of hanging in there as long as possible but having the 'back up' of some one else doing the deed once they get past the point of not being able to do it themselves.

Don't get me wrong, I feel enormous compassion for those who are suffering through no fault of their own and know full well that it can come unexpectedly to any of us. However this has been the human condition for millennia so what is really surprising about it? Is our own suffering any more or less important or meaningful than anyone else's?

I know it will sound callous but if those who want the right to choose the time of their own death aren't prepared to take matters into their own hands before the need to rely on someone else to do it where is their level of conviction?

Discuss.

THIS ONE _ I agree ...

Euthanasia is one of those tricky subjects - I support the principle, but cannot find a way that such a law could be written to protect the vulnerable, whilst allowing mercy to the suffering.

Who are these "vulnerable" that you speak of? Surely terminally ill people on the way out are way passed "vulnerable"?

You make it sound like we're planning on introducing a new job description of 'Executioner' to our society.

That could be one outcome - especially if enough doctors refuse to participte (as is their right).

Yeah, Katman - but every now and then you could, you know, try to debate the facts instead of trotting out the tired old ad hominem fuckwitschtick? The relevance of the analogies is the desire of your ilk to enforce your beliefs on other people who then you demand implement them. Or else. And the 'Or Else' enforced by Government Diktat.

Item 1: A bakery owner in Oregon broke down in tears while discussing the fallout of her and her husband’s decision not to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex couple on the basis of their Christian beliefs. Earlier this year, the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries found “substantial evidence” that Aaron and Melissa Klein, owners of Sweet Cakes by Melissa, discriminated against the lesbian couple. Oregon bakery owners face a $150,000 discrimination fine for not baking a wedding cake for lesbians. They now face a fine in excess of $150,000. Aaron said the fee would “definitely” be enough to bankrupt the couple and their five children.

Item 2: Police officers arrested two Latino men on the charge of 'manspreading' on the subway, presumably because they were taking up more than one seat and therefore inconveniencing other riders, according to the report. The term "manspreading" was coined by internet users to describe men taking up more than one public transport seat, by sitting with their knees wide open.

Irrational? To quote Inigo Montoya "I do not think that word means what you think it means."

Neither of these examples are from our country - why then do you speak of "us" ???

[Maha]

I love me

Do you charge you customers for your time on here? you spend an awful amount of time on here during business hours.

[oldrider]

Is wanking into a tissue or any other disposable receptacle murder? All those sperms killed. They are after all alive.

I've decided it is OK. After all women murder their eggs once a month. Cruel bitches.

True! - While they are all alive and kicking they also are not complete - perhaps conception is the true cut-off point between life or death?

Simply an observation on your post - not coming from any pre-fixed agenda! - (fuck that argument!)

[TheDemonLord]

Who are these "vulnerable" that you speak of? Surely terminally ill people on the way out are way passed "vulnerable"?

People who are of an unstable mental condition (I can't believe that coping with a terminal illness provides a good foundation for solid mental health) or otherwise not in a position to make their wishes known and have people who stand to gain from their quick demise.

[Maha]

An assisted dying law would not result in more people dying, but in fewer people suffering.
Now fuck off back to work.

[Katman]

People who are of an unstable mental condition (I can't believe that coping with a terminal illness provides a good foundation for solid mental health) or otherwise not in a position to make their wishes known and have people who stand to gain from their quick demise.

I imagine it wouldn't be too hard to put procedures in place to prevent people killing off their 'loved ones' for pecuniary gain.