(April 29, 2013 at 8:47 pm)Tex Wrote: If someone is living and we go out of our way to halt their life, it is called "murder".
False. Murder is the unlawful taking of a life, which is precisely what this issue is about. Should assisting someone in their death be lawful?
(April 29, 2013 at 8:47 pm)Tex Wrote: "Murder" is bad. We want to avoid "murder". If they do it by themselves, it is called "suicide". "Suicide" is also bad. We don't want that either.
Can you prove suicide is bad, or is that just your opinion?
(April 29, 2013 at 8:47 pm)Tex Wrote: Instead, a better option is to find the problem and fix it.
Better for who? The person suffering?
(April 29, 2013 at 8:47 pm)Tex Wrote: If we don't know how to fix it, we figure out how to fix it. For every person that is in pain and just says "Fuck it, I'm done" is one more person in pain later down the road for the same reason.
So, someone should have to suffer through unimaginable pain so we can experiment on them, and that person should be obligated to partake?
(April 29, 2013 at 8:47 pm)Tex Wrote: The people in pain can have whatever pain medication will help, but never can we facilitate death. Those people are still valuable.
Regardless of the fact that pain medication can be wholly inadequate to deal with human suffering, only the person living that life can determine whether their life is valuable enough to continue.
(April 29, 2013 at 8:47 pm)Tex Wrote: We should not destroy them.
You are simply using emotion in an attempt to bolster your argument here. We are not "destroying" them. We are helping them facilitate their own death.
Even if the open windows of science at first make us shiver after the cozy indoor warmth of traditional humanizing myths, in the end the fresh air brings vigor, and the great spaces have a splendor of their own - Bertrand Russell