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

[Catholic_Lady]

Why is my faith being brought into discussion? I specifically said this isn't about my faith.

Because it is your belief in the sacredness of life that impels you to draw a hard line, right?

When someone is depressed and wants to die, I think as a society we should strive to save them, not help them go through with hurting themselves. To me, this seems like a human thing, not a specifically religious thing.

Of course. Maybe you should then define what you mean by "hard line", especially in this context.

When we thought one of our friends from here was going to kill themselves, we called the cops on him to stop it from happening. We didn't sit around and say "oh well you know, let him do as he will. Ito none of our business. I hope someone is there to help him do it successfully." No, we tried to save him. And consisering this is an atheist forum, no one involved except myself was religious.

Of course. But this discussion is not about what friends do for or with each other. This discussion is about legal rights.

I'd like to think I would have concern for human life and think that it was valuable and worth fighting for, even if I didn't believe it was inherently sacred.

Just because someone isn't my friend, doesn't mean I can't hold the position that we should, as a society, treat suicidal people in such a way as to save them and get them help rather than stay out of it and make it legal for others to assist them in hurting themselves.

---

Oh, and what I was saying was that I think there should be a hard line when it comes to legalizing assisted suicide, and that the hard line should be that it's only available for the terminally ill or those who are debilitated.

It has nothing to do with religion, since personally/religiously I feel as though even that wouldn't be right, but don't think it should be illegal.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Well, we disagree, then. To my way of thinking, my life is not yours to control, and I think our legal rights should reflect that.

[Catholic_Lady]

I just think we should be a society that strives to help those battling depression and suicidal thoughts live, not one that helps these people die. And that our legal system should reflect that by limiting assisted suicide only to those who are terminally ill or debilitated. If that means I'm trying to "control someone's life" I suppose so be it, though I definitely wouldn't put it that way at all. A person has the free will to go and take their life at any moment. The question is whether or not a civilized society should assist them in doing it.

---

Sorry if I'm being annoying, and I know you're having a rough day, my friend. I just wanna make sure I'm completely clear on where I stand to those who may not have been following this whole discussion and that this isn't about control for me.

[Thumpalumpacus]

But at the end of it all, quite literally, it is about control ... the right to control one's own demise.

[Mr Greene]

On this point I am in total agreement with CL terminal illness might be considered a grey area but mental illness is not and with the overwhelming push to allow that I would have to draw the line before the terminally ill as well. 
Whether or not the mentally ill should be allowed to have children? Social Workers have already crossed that line, seizing children at birth and mandatorially sterilizing women.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I'm not saying that the right to die should be unfettered. I'm saying that enshrining feelings into law is a pretty dangerous thing to do.

[bennyboy]

I dunno, man. A lot of people are invested in one's life. The state invests in my education and in the facilities and resources that I use all my life. My parents and friends invest in their relationships with me. Do I have a right to unilaterally throw away all of that? What if I have a mortgage or other pending agreements? Does death mean not having to honor your word?

I understand that some people are in a spiritual black hole, and can never escape. That's terrible. However, others are in a rage equally uncontrollable, and when they commit murder, they are held accountable.

[ErGingerbreadMandude]

I dunno, man. A lot of people are invested in one's life. The state invests in my education and in the facilities and resources that I use all my life. My parents and friends invest in their relationships with me. Do I have a right to unilaterally throw away all of that? What if I have a mortgage or other pending agreements? Does death mean not having to honor your word?

I understand that some people are in a spiritual black hole, and can never escape. That's terrible. However, others are in a rage equally uncontrollable, and when they commit murder, they are held accountable.

Nobody has a right to control someone else's body because they've at some time "invested" in them. Would you be supportive of the state controlling a pregnant woman's body as they see fit because they've at some time invested in her?

Our body is our choice. Nobody else should have power to control that aspect of our life. We don't ask to be born, we should have every right to return the life we've been unsolicitedly forced upon if we wanted to.

Does death mean not having to honor your word?

If I have to pay off a loan and then one day I've had enough, I should be able to go to a suicide clinic and be done with it, they can accept my death as punishment I've given myself for not being able to honor my word.

[Aoi Magi]

Mental illness is still an illness, and it still causes suffering. I just think one person shouldn't have the legal backing to force another person to suffer against their will, especially when there is no solution to the suffering in foreseeable future. And this is why it should be a case by case thing with expert opinion necessary in every instance.

[bennyboy]

If I have to pay off a loan and then one day I've had enough, I should be able to go to a suicide clinic and be done with it, they can accept my death as punishment I've given myself for not being able to honor my word.

They, who? The taxpayers? The people working at the clinic? The banks? Why should you not wanting to live any more pose a financial burden on others? You are not making a decision for yourself, but also a unilateral (and deleterious) decision on the behalf of many others-- about how they might live their life, and about the degree to which they may or may not prosper. What about their rights?

Nobody has a right to control someone else's body because they've at some time "invested" in them.[ Would you be supportive of the state controlling a pregnant woman's body as they see fit because they've at some time invested in her?

That's a strange red herring. You might as well ask, "Would you be supportive of the state not letting people wear clown shoes because they've at some time invested in them?"

We're talking about the right to die, not about what one chooses to do with a functioning body. And in my view, there ARE certain obligations that come with living. A teenager who kills herself, for example, will completely destroy her parents' lives, and very likely not for anything they did. She cannot understand her hormones, her psychological state, and the degree to which these may be temporary. She should most certainly NOT be extended the right to kill herself.


I'd consider anyone who wants to kill himself, without a very compelling rational reason to do so, insane, and I don't think insane people should be allowed the freedom to make this type of decision.