(December 15, 2016 at 2:40 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote:(December 15, 2016 at 2:37 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: Do you think this should be restricted only to those who are terminally ill? Or at least permanently debilitated enough to where their quality of life is greatly diminished?
Or should it be open to whoever wishes to die?
My personal view? I'd prefer it be limited to those in the situations you mentioned, or in situations where treatment is unlikely to work, or with a doctor's recommendation. Having the input of some medical professionals should be a requirement, at least.
Regardless of the disagreements one might have about the extent of availability, I think we all (mostly) can agree that at least a good starting point would be having this option available for the terminally ill. Any further than that, sure we can discuss it, but for christ's sake let's at least get that on the books first.
Well personally I disagree with any killing, including killing of self and killing of someone who wants to be killed. But this isn't a question of personal values. It's a question of what should be legally permissible.
I think it should be legally permissible under specific circumstances only. Not as a "starting point" but as the only way this should be legally allowed.
...But now that I see how easily this can quickly turn into a slippery slope, I'm having second thoughts.
"Of course, everyone will claim they respect someone who tries to speak the truth, but in reality, this is a rare quality. Most respect those who speak truths they agree with, and their respect for the speaking only extends as far as their realm of personal agreement. It is less common, almost to the point of becoming a saintly virtue, that someone truly respects and loves the truth seeker, even when their conclusions differ wildly."
-walsh
-walsh
