Shouldn't the right to die be a human right?

[bennyboy]

No, it is not. It is the job of legislation, in a functioning democracy, of enforcing the social contract in order to assure the smooth operation of society.

Yes, and the social contract is made by an emotional species. But it's strange to me that you'd want to introduce the idea of social contract, when your argument is that people can use death as a way of invalidating it. In debt? No problem, suicide absolves me of debt. Connected to family who've invested years and perhaps hundreds of thousands of dollars in my well-being? No problem, suicide absolves me of my responsibility to them.

Fallacious appeal to consequences. You've not addressed the point, which is that bodily autonomy is not something which should be subsumed to the greater good of society, which seems to be the crux of your argument. If the government can force you to remain alive for its own purposes, how is that not forced labor of a sort, when the person in question finds even living a chore?

My idea of what "human rights" are is different than yours, I think. I don't see human rights as constitutional amendments, I see them as things that we consider intrinsic to the experience of being human. So not only do I not think the government should legislate on the issue, I don't think the IDEA that suicide is a general human right should be accepted, except in very special circumstances.

You want to talk about dangerous precedents? Let's talk about this idea that the government has the right to treat us like pawns, and that our lives aren't our own to spend as we please. That would be quite the slope we could ski, there.  

I've already said that in terminal cases, suicide should be allowable. It's my position that it should not GENERALLY be considered a human right. This is because humanity is a web of family, friends, and legal obligations, and suicide is a unilateral decision that negatively affects those in the web near you-- what about THEIR rights?