Last edited Thu Mar 24, 2016, 01:30 PM - Edit history (1)
re your repugnant position
Repugnant only to those that presume they have some binding interest in the lives of others.
That would be you.
I presumed only what you yourself wrote, that it would be OK for someone to "take their own lives for any reason". Which would obviously include impulsive suicides based on a temporary setback.
No. A requisite of your position, is an assumed binding interest in the individual lives of others.
And you do assume such a thing, let there be no doubt.
Which is an asinine position to take, which is you in your nutshell. You never heard the axiom that 'suicide is a permanent solution to a temporary problem'? usually the case.
Aww, the predictable personal attack. It must be terrible for you to have your fee-fees hurt so badly that you can't stop yourself from lashing out. I wont even alert, because it amuses me to have it shown for all to see.
Even assisted suicide doctors will only consent if the suicidal patient is deemed a forlorn hope.
Doctors are acting as licensed agents of the State, not individual citizens, in that context. Apples and oranges.
You are ineptly trying to defend suicidal patients right to die, with suicides in general.
The only thing inept here, is you bothering to try to trade blows with me. Dunning-Kruger in effect for all to see, right there.
And trying? Excuse me, but if people have the right to life, they also have a right to end that life. Just as freedom of religion includes freedom from religion, the right to life includes the right to end that life.
I can't help it if you're not sharp enough to rub two conceptual sticks together to generate a little intellectual warmth...that's entirely on you.
You desperately need to reword your repugnant position on this.
Fat chance little fella.
= new reply since forum marked as read