I think Oregon is a right to die state.
-
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?
- Thread starter Rival
- Start date
I think Oregon is a right to die state.
Callisto
Hellenismos, BTW
Of course you're entitled to your opinion. I wouldn't suggest otherwise. I simply have a different opinion.
What makes you think there are no graceful, painless ways already? Doctors are not going to provide lethal injections, hell people already balk at the use of those drugs for executions. Prescriptions? Again, people already have the ability to overdose on any cocktail they can think up whether Rx or over the counter.
There are not going to be walk-in clinics for people who decide they want to die on par with deciding to get botox to smooth some wrinkles. And it certainly would not be funded so the service is for free. You already have politicians who balk at free school meals for children and food stamps. Then throw in religions and pharmaceutical lobbyists protesting and the risk of an increase in individuals being counseled to consider it as an option (that slippery slope towards eugenics). "Bad idea" starts to be an understatement.
You speak for the U.S. only.
Also, for the suicidal individual I think it is an option. A last option but an option nonetheless.
Why is it that older people in the UK get poorer medical service and are not granted some surgeries that younger people are? I think it could be that you have allowed the government to rate the quality of your lives, and so it has begun to do so. Fifty years is not a long time for that to happen in. Its a short amount of time, so on the one hand you get help from the state for suicide but on the other the state recognizes that life may not be worth living for some people and starts using it to save money.
Wirey
Fartist
Of course not. the state should provide medical treatment so you are no longer suicidal.
Now if you're talking about someone with Lou Gehrig's disease or something, that's different.
We don't have poor medical service. That's a myth.
What if it can't be fixed medically? Existential depression for instance.
Callisto
Hellenismos, BTW
I'm speaking mainly from a US pov but there is no shortage of means for people to kill themselves regardless of where they are and I'm not familiar with an epidemic of Brits tossing themselves off of bridges or in front of buses. Granted, I was in London a few months ago so it could be a sudden rash.
Suicidal people have options, no joke. At the risk of repeating myself, if someone is truly determined they will find a way regardless of what is or is not provided by the government. The first person I knew to kill themselves was 15 years old and she opted for asphyxiation (carbon monoxide - running car in a closed garage). Odorless, painless, free. Granted, that was in the 1980s but it's not the only means. The point is "where there is a will, there's a way". The bigger issue is getting people the help they need which isn't simply helping them to check out. More often than not they need counseling and learning ways to better cope. There would have to be a process in place to help people sort things out, death is rather final and for most individuals it would do more good to help them get a handle on things.
Wirey
Fartist
I've never heard of depression that beer couldn't cure. Or make worse, I forget.
Seriously, if a society allows suicide because a citizen is depressed, that society is doomed. Ignoring for a second the rights of the individual, society demands participation from it's members. If the members of a society check out, the society disappears. Considering the rights of the individual, everyone has the right to life (in a just society anyway). Being ill with any form of depression removes the ability of the individual to make a coherent judgment regarding their own continued existence. Therefore, from the perspective of the state, the number one priority of the state must be to rehabilitate and reintegrate that member. If the state even passively allows the member to succumb to depression, that society is finished. It no longer values it's members, and they will leave.
Satans_Serrated_Edge
Deicidal
I think they have conclusively shown that mental states that cause suicidal thoughts are generally temporary anyway.
So slap on a one month time buffer.
So, come back in a month. If you still want to die and can afford our services here at Snuffem Inc at that time, then prepare to die.
So slap on a one month time buffer.
So, come back in a month. If you still want to die and can afford our services here at Snuffem Inc at that time, then prepare to die.
I'm referring to BBC news reports:
"At four out of six mental health trusts examined in England decisions were based as much on age as clinical need, the Healthcare Commission found." BBC NEWS | Health | Mental services 'shut to elderly'
"Age discrimination in the NHS has been made illegal but the report says it may still happen when budgets are tight." NHS surgery 'age discrimination' - BBC News
I can either dismiss it as a bizarre coincidence, or I can look at it as something that is happening for a reason. The attitude appears to be that as people get older their healthcare is worth less, and the state support of suicide probably does not help.
psychoslice
Veteran Member
Yes of course we should be able to end our life, there should be no buts about it.
Yes, Oregon and Washington have laws specifically permitting physician-assisted suicide. In addition to the states that have repealed statutes criminalizing suicide, several states do not have laws criminalizing assisted suicide.
Aye, if our life is our own, then we have the right to end it.
But if the state has this authority over us, & can force us
to live when we wish otherwise, then it's their life.
The state cannot decide for us if life is not worth living.
It is too dumb, & too riddled with those who would impose
their own values upon us at the expense of civil liberties.
Medical treatment of depression & other disease is imperfect.
So the individual must decide one's future existence.
psychoslice
Veteran Member
Yes that is true, i will decide if I want to end my life, I also believe that the church is behind all this, we have been so conditioned by them, so it affects all, even the state, and yes i hate civil liberties, they have ruined everything.
Aye, we are up against some religions which prohibit suicide.
This is their right to make this choice for themselves, but not for others.
psychoslice
Veteran Member
This how most people will die, its called the death rattle, you will struggle to breath until you cannot breath no more, I watched my mum go through this, she actually died or what we thought was death three times, each time I closed her eyes, she would then start breathing again and went through the whole damn thing. No one knows what its like until they have been with a loved one and watch them go through this.
The fact that it's illegal should tell you something. People will always break the law though, especially in the tough times the NHS is facing because the Tory government is drastically underfunding it. They are systematically trying to destroy the NHS so they can privatise it. Everyone knows this.
Existential depression is not regular depression, It cannot be cured with drugs. A lot of people with it go on to suicide. Realising that life is meaningless, morality is made up, one is basically always alone with one's thoughts and free essentially in a purposeless world drives some people to insanity. I know, I've been there and it still affects me now and will forever.
That's not what I asked tho. Should the State provide painfree, safe, proven drugs to help one ends one's life quickly and painlessly?