• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Should The State Actively Let You Suicide?

Kilgore Trout

Misanthropic Humanist
I find it cruel that you think people who are suffering massively already for some reason need to suffer even more even as they die.

I find it cruel that you think attacking some strawman you setup is actually addressing anything I actually said.
 

Rival

Diex Aie
Staff member
Premium Member
I have come to conclude that delimiting the responsibilities involving self-termination is not a matter for the state to decide. It can be difficult to establish who should decide, and that is probably for the best.
I fail to understand how providing a person with a safe and sure way to die is taking the responsibility away from the suicidal person.
 

Rival

Diex Aie
Staff member
Premium Member
I'd rather the person have to undergo psychological evaluation and counseling first before state sponsored assisted suicide, just like you must do for any non-emergency surgery, because it should not be a snap judgement, and the patient should be made aware of treatment options. But yes, ultimately I'm for painless end of life options for people who are suffering needlessly.
Yes, I agree.
 

Rival

Diex Aie
Staff member
Premium Member
My meaning is. Its against the law. But to be punished for breaking this law you must attempt but fail to carry it out.
Yes, I understand. It is still cruel though. Here, if you try and fail to kill yourself it's not a crime at all.
 
I mean rather than having to run in front of a truck or jump from a bridge, should the State provide a person who wishes to kill himself a safe and painless method of doing so? Assume this would apply to those 18+.

Yes, with the caveat of having their affairs in order. This would include prepaying for disposal of remains or burial. As long as they don't leave a mess or financial obligations who cares?
 

Rival

Diex Aie
Staff member
Premium Member
Yes, with the caveat of having their affairs in order. This would include prepaying for disposal of remains or burial. As long as they don't leave a mess or financial obligations who cares?
State funded funeral or relatives sympathetic.
 

David1967

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Yes, I understand. It is still cruel though. Here, if you try and fail to kill yourself it's not a crime at all.

Gotcha. My feelings about it. If a person is dying a slow painful death from some horrible disease or accident with no hope of recovering, and they want to end their life with dignity, then yes ,they should have that option. My feelings are very strong about this.
 

Nous

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
I mean rather than having to run in front of a truck or jump from a bridge, should the State provide a person who wishes to kill himself a safe and painless method of doing so? Assume this would apply to those 18+.
As far as I know, most anyone anywhere can go to a doctor, complain of excruciating back pain and get a prescription for enough opioids to kill oneself. Possibly such a prescription would be more difficult to obtain in the case of those who have habitually used opioids. (I'm not sure that an overdose of opioids is entirely painless, however. All kinds of analgesic drugs hurt my stomach.)

Of course, lots of people survive their suicide attempts (there are a number of cases of people who used a gun and missed their head). Again and again I've read where survivors said, "As soon as I jumped off the bridge, I regretted it. I'm glad I didn't die."
 

Rival

Diex Aie
Staff member
Premium Member
Of course, lots of people survive their suicide attempts (there are a number of cases of people who used a gun and missed their head). Again and again I've read where survivors said, "As soon as I jumped off the bridge, I regretted it. I'm glad I didn't die."
Yeah but dead people have no regrets.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
I fail to understand how providing a person with a safe and sure way to die is taking the responsibility away from the suicidal person.
Yeah, they are not very convergent matters. Sorry if I implied otherwise.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
My meaning is. Its against the law. But to be punished for breaking this law you must attempt but fail to carry it out.

I've always thought it was kind of a dumb law anyway. Has anyone ever actually been prosecuted and sentenced for attempting suicide? It would make as much sense as to impose the death penalty as punishment for a failed suicide attempt.

I remember a few years back, an inmate on death row attempted suicide a few days before he was scheduled to be executed. They took him to the hospital and made quite an effort to save his life, only to put him to death a few days later.
 

Brickjectivity

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Of course, lots of people survive their suicide attempts (there are a number of cases of people who used a gun and missed their head). Again and again I've read where survivors said, "As soon as I jumped off the bridge, I regretted it. I'm glad I didn't die."
Its true that often death appears one way one moment and another the next.

As far as I know, most anyone anywhere can go to a doctor, complain of excruciating back pain and get a prescription for enough opioids to kill oneself. Possibly such a prescription would be more difficult to obtain in the case of those who have habitually used opioids. (I'm not sure that an overdose of opioids is entirely painless, however. All kinds of analgesic drugs hurt my stomach.)
I know someone who pointed a gun at their head, shot themselves and recovered. They could still read/write do their job and rear their children.
 
Top