RE: Euthanasia for non-terminal illnesses
April 10, 2015 at 1:31 am
(This post was last modified: April 10, 2015 at 1:37 am by Thumpalumpacus.)
(April 10, 2015 at 1:10 am)Iroscato Wrote:That depends on how stretchy your definitions are.(April 10, 2015 at 12:58 am)Minimalist Wrote: Choice is what this is all about. I can think of situations where people without an illness might commit suicide.
They were not drunk, drugged or crazy.
Fanatical devotion to a nation, cause or cult can be considered a type of mental illness, can it not?
And what of someone who sacrifices their own life for a stranger? That sort of thing happens outside the context of religion or the military fraternity.
The guy who died in 1982 in the Potomac air crash swimming to save a total stranger -- was that suicide? Or was that altruism?
And even inside the context of military teamwork: the chaplain on the USS Houston gave up his place on a life raft after his ship was sunk, saying to his shipmates "I'm an old guy, you have the rest of your life ahead of you." Was that suicide?
My own opinion is that there is no reason for government to intrude so closely upon the lives of citizens that it should dictate the manner of their deaths. Such a moment is as personal a moment as someone can experience. Exactly what business does the government have dictating when someone may or may not die?