Euthanasia

i'd do it if and only if:
- the person is helpless: with this i only mean he has no hope of cure for his current disease or situation that will unavoidable take him to death, AND
- the person decided to do it because he/she will suffer a great ammount of pain in the days that will precede his/her death, AND
- The person asked it for those reasons.

EDIT: so no further ambiguity takes place in this post (added an AND)
 
I'm getting quite sick on my stomach.

Luis G said:
i'd do it if:
- the person is helpless: with this i only mean he has no hope of cure for his current disease or situation that will unavoidable take him to death.
Rather kill the helpless eh? It is much easier if they don't put up a fight.
- the person decided to do it because he/she will suffer a great ammount of pain in the days that will precede his/her death.
There are pain killers. Very effective ones.

- The person asked it for those reasons.
So suppose a close friend has severe emotional pain, broke up with a long relationship, and is a mess. He decides to commit suicide, and is helpless because he has no hope for his current situation. He comes to you and tells you to kill him. Would you throw him over a bridge?
 
LL, I think Luis knows that if a person has a chance of living a long, happy life then they shouldn't die. Your friend does. So of course no one should help him die.
 
LL, do you know the logical AND operator? (i bet you do)
if you don't here it goes:
assume you have two conditions A and B, an AND statement will be truth if and only if both A and B are truth.

now that you know that, apply the AND operator to my previous 3 reasons and you can give yourself an idea of the given situation in which i would help a friend.
 
Scanty said:
LL, I think Luis knows that if a person has a chance of living a long, happy life then they shouldn't die. Your friend does. So of course no one should help him die.
And who is he to judge that? Hm let us see:

The Dutch survey, reviewed in the Journal of Medical Ethics, looked at the figures for 1995 and found that as well as 3,600 authorized cases there were 900 others in which doctors had acted without explicit consent.

Hm that is 900 legal murders just there!! So fucking convenient!! Lets get rid of them, they are an annoyance to society.

"A lot of people in Holland are frightened to go into hospital because of this situation."

You bet your life I would be scared if I know someone might take it upon him that "I won't be useful to society anymore" and just err, euthanize me because its so convenient.

Sick.
 
Luis G said:
LL, do you know the logical AND operator? (i bet you do)
if you don't here it goes:
assume you have two conditions A and B, an AND statement will be truth if and only if both A and B are truth.

now that you know that, apply the AND operator to my previous 3 reasons and you can give yourself an idea of the given situation in which i would help a friend.
Sarcasm is a great way to argue in a philosophical discussion.
 
Forgive me for being so rude, but, by the above rules I would have murdered my bloodfriend two nights ago. :mad2:
 
"I think Luis knows that if a person has a chance of living a long, happy life then..."

I said 'if'. He's not judging anything.

With all due respect, LL, I think you're twisting what Luis is saying. And also implying that he is 'sick' which is a bit harsh, I think.
 
LastLegionary said:
To all those supporters of euthanasia. I support the death penalty, and if I'm called up I will pull the trigger and kill someone sentenced to death, and I would not have a problem with it.

Would you murder an unborn child? And, if your best friend comes up to you and asks you to murder him (euthanasia), would you?

I answer NO in both circumstances, and I am opposed to both. Unless you are willing to take the knife and murder the baby or person, I don't see how you can support it.
This is the one im talking about, hot shot. Do you even read what you write? ... or cut and paste for that matter.
 
LastLegionary said:
Forgive me for being so rude, but, by the above rules I would have murdered my bloodfriend two nights ago. :mad2:

No you wouldn't have. Your friend has a chance of living a nice life and every effort should be made so that he can. 'Helpless' doesn't mean the same thing as being in a depressed mental state. Mind problems have some hope of being cured, whereas a terminal illnes doesn't.
 
Scanty said:
LastLegionary said:
Forgive me for being so rude, but, by the above rules I would have murdered my bloodfriend two nights ago. :mad2:

No you wouldn't have. Your friend has a chance of living a nice life and every effort should be made so that he can. 'Helpless' doesn't mean the same thing as being in a depressed mental state. Mind problems have some hope of being cured, whereas a terminal illnes doesn't.
And as doctors and enlightened human beings we always knows what is best right? And we can make flawless judgments of what someone's future life is going to be like.

I'm sorry for coming forth so strong. I think I'm going to stay out of this thread before I really say something I regret. Sorry for any pain I caused, but I know when enough is enough, for me.
 
LastLegionary said:
Forgive me for being so rude, but, by the above rules I would have murdered my bloodfriend two nights ago. :mad2:

i wouldn't do it in that case because: "he wasn't sick nor he had an ill that will unavoidable take him to death" AND "he wasn't experiencing a physical pain before his unavoidable death caused by sickness or illness" AND "he wasn't asking me to help him because of the previous two conditions".

(ok, i worded it in a logical/mathematical way to avoid confussions).

As Scanty said, you are twisting my statements.
 
And as doctors and enlightened human beings we always knows what is best right? And we can make flawless judgments of what someone's future life is going to be like.

Shit.
How can you say this and then be FOR the death penalty? ^That is the EXACT reason why I say that capital punishment is wrong. Because as mere humans we can't make the decision when it comes to death. Christ.
 
LastLegionary said:
And as doctors and enlightened human beings we always knows what is best right? And we can make flawless judgments of what someone's future life is going to be like.

under the given circumstances i posted before, the individual to be "euthanised" is asking for his death.
 
LastLegionary said:
Luis you reworded it so it sounds more convenient. Both posts are edited out.

the first post was edited just to add two ANDs, and the reason of the edit is there, i didn't add anything else to the post.

[edit]that's the only relevant change i've made to the other posts, i edit all the time, because english is not my primary language and sometimes i detect typos or poor grammar.[/edit]

btw, i edited this post to show the last paragraph :D
 
So if a 20 year old friend, in advanced stages of cancer, 1 year to live at most, in pain every day, asks me to, err, euthanize him, I can just pull out a gun and shoot him in the chest?

I'm sorry I will not do that. I will not murder someone just for convenience to him or me.
 
i never said anything about MY convenience.

other than that, i will "euthanize him" (obviously not with a gun).
 
Forget the convenience to you, we're not discussing that.

But the convenience to him? You don't care about that at all? Someone is in terrible pain and mental suffering and prays everyday that they can just be in peace at last - and you'd deny them that?

Plus...stop using the dramatic ways of killing. I doubt very much that doctors whip out a .50 and put a few bullets in the patient's chest.
 
Luis G said:
(obviously not with a gun).
I suppose not. Its to messy eh? What is the real difference? I mean the result is the same.

Scanty, would you euthanize your mother if she asked it from you, and the "regulations" Luis described were there? (the pain and stuff)
 
Back
Top