Do we ALL have a "right to die"?

[Loren Pechtel]

So what might convince me that I'm wrong? As the old saying goes, "Seeing is believing." I want to see all these loving, compassionate and respectful people truly helping the disabled by granting them the right to die after exhausting all the alternatives to help them live quality lives, of course.

Aha! You are attacking something we are not defending.

It's not about "the disabled", it's about those who are suffering. Most of them are terminally ill and approaching death.

 

[TomC]

It's not about "the disabled", it's about those who are suffering.

Perhaps this is the problem.
@Unknown Soldier doesn't grasp the distinction between people who are disabled and people who just want it over with?

It's not the same thing. But it might look that way to someone who has been disabled for decades.

I dunno. I just don't understand why he has this bee in his bonnet. But clearly, he does.
Tom

 

[Unknown Soldier]

I'm sorry if I confused you, but I stipulated "I want to see all these loving, compassionate and respectful people truly helping the disabled by granting them the right to die after exhausting all the alternatives to help them live quality lives, of course." YouTube videos don't count as "seeing." Can you post links to any pro euthanasia groups that I can investigate to see if they can truly help improve the quality of my life?

I'm very much with you on the "YouTube isn't very credible." It isn't to me either.

It's not that I don't think that all YouTube videos are not credible. Many of them have useful and accurate information in them. I just wouldn't rely on them as proof that those who demand "death with dignity" are truly the sincere, sensible, compassionate people they claim to be. As Carl Sagan used to say: "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." The claims made by many people regarding assisted suicide are very extraordinary, and I won't just take anybody's word for it. I want to actually see the good that euthanasia supposedly offers before I accept those claims.

If you want to see it up close and personal, you'd have to do it yourself. I know nothing about you, including where you live. So I can't give you specific recommendations.

I've been involved with many groups and agencies who claim to be advocates for the disabled. Without exception they were either phony or self-serving or both.

But I'd bet that various local volunteer groups exist wherever it is. Try Hospice maybe.

Hospices kill people? Maybe inadvertently!

I'm absolutely sure that if you were willing to try you could find opportunities to see the issue for yourself.

I don't share your assurance. As you should know those who promote the supposed right to die here on this thread show contempt for the dying rather than any real respect or compassion for them.

I believe it would improve the quality of your life.

What life of mine could be improved if I was dead?

 

[TomC]

What life of mine could be improved if I was dead?

I sincerely hope that you'll reread my post and realize that I didn't say that because I don't think anything like that.

I don't think anything like that. I flat out don't believe that's true, given what little I know about you personally. I believe it's true for a tiny fraction of people. People who could decide that for themselves. Nobody else. Not you.

Frankly, nobody I've known for over 30 years.
Tom

 

[Rhea]

those who promote the supposed right to die here on this thread show contempt for the dying rather than any real respect or compassion for them.

Can you please explicitly say which person on this thread at any time showed contempt for the dying?
Can you demonstrate that you have not made a false accusation against your fellow posters?

 

[Unknown Soldier]

those who promote the supposed right to die here on this thread show contempt for the dying rather than any real respect or compassion for them.

Can you please explicitly say which person on this thread at any time showed contempt for the dying?

Here's a choice morsel:

If they want to care for a pseudo-corpse that's their business, but they have no right to put the burden on anyone else.

And let's not miss this gem:

Being ignored and thought a selfish and immoral fool is probably sufficient.

Have you actually read and thought about what's been posted on this thread? Can you offer an explanation for how the two quotations above are anything other than pathological?

Can you demonstrate that you have not made a false accusation against your fellow posters?

Just read what I've posted and fact-check all of it. The truth should be sufficient.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

I wasn't going to reply to any more of your posts because of the hate-filled insults you made about Terri Schindler and her family, but I can't resist this one:

Plenty of people are unwilling to accept that a loved one is gone. She was not sentient--the part of the brain that houses consciousness was gone. People see random reflex movements that sometimes happen in relation to what they said and interpret it as a response to what they said.

If it's true that Terri's brain could not produce awareness, then why did that condition mandate that she be put to death? I see no logical or moral reason to do so. She could feel no pain or discomfort of any kind, and there's no way she would have wanted to die. The Schindler's offered to fully support Terri's life so no burden would have been placed on anybody else. They feared greatly for her life and wanted to save her. But Michael Schiavo, fully aware of these facts, still demanded that Terri be put to death.

So you defeated many of your arguments in that assertion of yours. So I'd recommend you think a bit more before asserting as fact that which you don't know and cannot know.

 

[bilby]

those who promote the supposed right to die here on this thread show contempt for the dying rather than any real respect or compassion for them.

Can you please explicitly say which person on this thread at any time showed contempt for the dying?

Here's a choice morsel:

If they want to care for a pseudo-corpse that's their business, but they have no right to put the burden on anyone else.

And let's not miss this gem:

Being ignored and thought a selfish and immoral fool is probably sufficient.

Have you actually read and thought about what's been posted on this thread? Can you offer an explanation for how the two quotations above are anything other than pathological?

Can you demonstrate that you have not made a false accusation against your fellow posters?

Just read what I've posted and fact-check all of it. The truth should be sufficient.

Well, let's see just exactly how contemptuous of the dying my sentence you quoted actually is:

Being ignored and thought a selfish and immoral fool is probably sufficient.

You can prefer anything you like for yourself. It's when you imagine that others should give crap the first about your preferences for them, that you fuck up royally.

Hmm. It's possibly contemptuous of YOU.

It's absolutely not contemptuous of the dying - on the contrary, it's a defence of their right to their own opinions, which you are openly determined to replace with YOUR opinions.

If you can't argue your case without resorting to this kind of blatant dishonesty, then you likely realise even yourself that you are in the wrong.

Certainly everyone else can see it.

Perhaps you hoped that nobody would bother to fact check your claim if you invited them to do so. If so, that would appear to be further excellent evidence for my assessment that you're an immoral fool.

Or maybe you think "the dying" only means YOU, thereby providing further excellent evidence that you are selfish.

Evidently you are hugely butt-hurt at being called out for your dishonesty, selfishness, immorality, and foolishness. But that's on you. The truth is a complete defence against claims of defamation.

 

[Rhea]

those who promote the supposed right to die here on this thread show contempt for the dying rather than any real respect or compassion for them.

Can you please explicitly say which person on this thread at any time showed contempt for the dying?

Here's a choice morsel:

If they want to care for a pseudo-corpse that's their business, but they have no right to put the burden on anyone else.

In this thread, you seem to have conflated four completely separate categories. You treat them as if they are all the same and express that it is contemptuous for anyone to treat them as separate. I believe you are flat out wrong to conflate them. Let’s examine:

1. People who are deeply grieving (the despondent divorcee)
2. People who are disabled
3. People who are terminally ill
4. People who are brain-dead - the body operates but there is no brain activity.

Now lets look at how you view each group, versus how others on this thread have viewed them. You have used strong language like contempt and Nazi-like to describe anyone who disagrees with you. But let’s look. NOtice that your stated opinion treats each of these groups identically. And the other opinions expressed on this thread threat them as the individuals that they are.

1. People who are deeply grieving (the despondent divorcee)
   1. You say people in this thread are pushing death on this group. And that these people should be prevented from accessing assisted death
   2. No one advocates pushing death on these people.
      • Everyone else, including existing laws, agrees that they are not eligible to access assisted death, nor would almost any physician provide it.
      • Instead, therapy and support are the suggested offerings.
2. People who are disabled
   1. You say people in this thread are pushing death on this group. And that these people should be prevented from accessing assisted death
   2. No one advocates pushing death on these people.
      • Most of us know disabled people who are happy to continue the life they are living.
      • The existing laws states that they are not eligible to access assisted death.
   3. I can, however imagine some cases of disabled people who may be unwilling to continue life under their disability due to its severity.
      • I don’t know that I would choose the same but I can imagine someone saying, “It’s too much. I hate this life,” and I would want them to have a humane off-ramp.
      • This is absolutely not “contempt,” however, because that is a choice only they can make, not me. And while I would first want to ensure they had every possibility of overcoming whatever makes their life untenable, such as additional services, medications, or support; I honor their choice.
      • I advocate for assisted death with dignity to be available to them if they choose it. Key - THEIR choice.
3. People who have terminal diseases
   1. You say people in this thread are pushing death on this group. And that these people should be prevented from accessing assisted death
   2. No one advocates pushing death on these people.
      • We are aware of the excrutiating torture that some diseases can visit upon their victims before death occurs. I consider it monstrous to force a person to endure a painful death when a pain-free one can be given. I consider it monstrous to ask a dying person to choose between starving themselves to death or waiting to lose their minds.
      • I am absolutely an advocate for assisted death with dignity for those who face months or years of torture from their disease, if they choose it. Key - THEIR choice.
      • I will absolutely, definitely, and unequivocally ask for this path if I am diagnosed with the same disease that killed my grandmother and is killing my mother. No hesitation, and I will rain epic chaos down on any self-righteous prick who tries to force years of torture onto me by dishonoring my wish.
4. People who are brain-dead - the body operates but there is no brain activity. (Terry Shaivo case)
   1. You say people in this thread are pushing death on this group. And that these people should be prevented from accessing assisted death
      • Your position states that no organ donation can occur because the body cannot be harmed in a way that leads to cessation of function. This would violate the express wishes of many people.
   2. No one advocates pushing death on these people. They are already dead.
      • My position is that what makes us people is our bain activity. And when the brain structure is gone, the person is dead, even if the heart still beats. This is not contempt. This is honoring the “person” who is no longer there.

In the end, you treat with scorn any deviation from your definitions which treat the despondent, the disabled, the terminally ill and the already dead as the same. But I, and others on this thread contend that they are not the same, that indeed each is an individual with authority to judge their own case, and the right to decide on their own if they wish to avoid a painful or protracted dying process in favor of a fast and painless one.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

I'm sorry if I confused you, but I stipulated...

You didn't confuse me, I've been aware of the kind of rigged game you play...

I've heard of rigged elections before, but this is the first time I've heard of rigged posts.

...since your earliest threads at IIDB.

You've had me under surveillance that long. I guess I can't complain that I'm being ignored.

The point in posting some vids is that the evidence is out there, it's you refusing to look that is the reason that you don't see it.

What about those videos is important for me to know? I assume you've watched them.

 

[abaddon]

What about those videos is important for me to know?

They have dying people explaining why they've requested assisted suicide and it's a glimpse into the process of getting the request granted. If "rigged game" doesn't click then let me phrase it this way: your "stipulations" are sophistic jackassery. That's why I chose to ignore them and post something relevant to the topic of the right to die. You keep mentioning the limits of your experience so I took a little time to offer a chance for you to fill in some of that ignorance. Watch or don't...

Study Rhea's post just above. She's put in notable effort to help you clarify your thoughts. You hurt no one but yourself if you won't welcome the chance to do that.

 

[Rhea]

Btw I have edited my post above to include the following:

I will absolutely, definitely, and unequivocally ask for this path if I am diagnosed with the same disease that killed my grandmother and is killing my mother. No hesitation, and I will rain epic chaos down on any self-righteous prick who tries to force years of torture onto me by dishonoring my wish.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

those who promote the supposed right to die here on this thread show contempt for the dying rather than any real respect or compassion for them.

Can you please explicitly say which person on this thread at any time showed contempt for the dying?

Here's a choice morsel:

If they want to care for a pseudo-corpse that's their business, but they have no right to put the burden on anyone else.

In this thread, you seem to have conflated four completely separate categories. You treat them as if they are all the same and express that it is contemptuous for anyone to treat them as separate. I believe you are flat out wrong to conflate them. Let’s examine:

1. People who are deeply grieving (the despondent divorcee)
2. People who are disabled
3. People who are terminally ill
4. People who are brain-dead - the body operates but there is no brain activity.

Now lets look at how you view each group, versus how others on this thread have viewed them. You have used strong language like contempt and Nazi-like to describe anyone who disagrees with you. But let’s look. NOtice that your stated opinion treats each of these groups identically. And the other opinions expressed on this thread threat them as the individuals that they are.

1. People who are deeply grieving (the despondent divorcee)
   1. You say people in this thread are pushing death on this group. And that these people should be prevented from accessing assisted death
   2. No one advocates pushing death on these people.
      • Everyone else, including existing laws, agrees that they are not eligible to access assisted death, nor would almost any physician provide it.
      • Instead, therapy and support are the suggested offerings.
2. People who are disabled
   1. You say people in this thread are pushing death on this group. And that these people should be prevented from accessing assisted death
   2. No one advocates pushing death on these people.
      • Most of us know disabled people who are happy to continue the life they are living.
      • The existing laws states that they are not eligible to access assisted death.
   3. I can, however imagine some cases of disabled people who may be unwilling to continue life under their disability due to its severity.
      • I don’t know that I would choose the same but I can imagine someone saying, “It’s too much. I hate this life,” and I would want them to have a humane off-ramp.
      • This is absolutely not “contempt,” however, because that is a choice only they can make, not me. And while I would first want to ensure they had every possibility of overcoming whatever makes their life untenable, such as additional services, medications, or support; I honor their choice.
      • I advocate for assisted death with dignity to be available to them if they choose it. Key - THEIR choice.
3. People who have terminal diseases
   1. You say people in this thread are pushing death on this group. And that these people should be prevented from accessing assisted death
   2. No one advocates pushing death on these people.
      • We are aware of the excrutiating torture that some diseases can visit upon their victims before death occurs. I consider it monstrous to force a person to endure a painful death when a pain-free one can be given. I consider it monstrous to ask a dying person to choose between starving themselves to death or waiting to lose their minds.
      • I am absolutely an advocate for assisted death with dignity for those who face months or years of torture from their disease, if they choose it. Key - THEIR choice.
      • I will absolutely, definitely, and unequivocally ask for this path if I am diagnosed with the same disease that killed my grandmother and is killing my mother. No hesitation, and I will rain epic chaos down on any self-righteous prick who tries to force years of torture onto me by dishonoring my wish.
4. People who are brain-dead - the body operates but there is no brain activity. (Terry Shaivo case)
   1. You say people in this thread are pushing death on this group. And that these people should be prevented from accessing assisted death
      • Your position states that no organ donation can occur because the body cannot be harmed in a way that leads to cessation of function. This would violate the express wishes of many people.
   2. No one advocates pushing death on these people. They are already dead.
      • My position is that what makes us people is our bain activity. And when the brain structure is gone, the person is dead, even if the heart still beats. This is not contempt. This is honoring the “person” who is no longer there.

In the end, you treat with scorn any deviation from your definitions which treat the despondent, the disabled, the terminally ill and the already dead as the same. But I, and others on this thread contend that they are not the same, that indeed each is an individual with authority to judge their own case, and the right to decide on their own if they wish to avoid a painful or protracted dying process in favor of a fast and painless one.

Rhea, you're skipping over the issues I raised earlier regarding the character and the credibility of those who espouse assisted death for the dying. I must include you among those I don't believe. I don't trust any of you any farther than I can throw a Mack truck. Posting a lot of assertions won't change my mind.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

What about those videos is important for me to know?

They have dying people explaining why they've requested assisted suicide and it's a glimpse into the process of getting the request granted.

OK. Do you want me to respond by posting links to videos I agree with?

If "rigged game" doesn't click then let me phrase it this way: your "stipulations" are sophistic jackassery.

You can call them anything you want, but I'm not going to just take anybody's word for some life-and-death issue. I might well change my mind a bit if I actually knew somebody who benefitted from assisted suicide, but every person I've ever known took the traditional route and died with all the dignity that you suicide advocates advertise.

That's why I chose to ignore them...

It appears to me that you simply lack good evidence for your claims and are angry that I don't just hop on the bandwagon.

...and post something relevant to the topic of the right to die.

So you don't consider my seeing actual evidence as "relevant to the topic." Religious people take that same approach when I question their dogmas. But I'm consistent in that I won't take anything on faith foolishly believing it just because I'm told.

You keep mentioning the limits of your experience so I took a little time to offer a chance for you to fill in some of that ignorance. Watch or don't...

I just don't know if I can stomach watching people who have been encouraged to commit suicide. It's not what I normally want to view.

Study Rhea's post just above. She's put in notable effort to help you clarify your thoughts. You hurt no one but yourself if you won't welcome the chance to do that.

She didn't address my concerns about the character of the people here pushing suicide. I tend to think about claims by judging if the person(s) making those claims are to be believed. So far it looks ridiculous to me that I or anybody believe what's been claimed about the wonders of assisted death.

 

[abaddon]

Here's a better screenname for you: Bubble Boy. The self-enclosed person with a mirror on the inside of his bubble and armor against information outside.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Here's a better screenname for you: Bubble Boy. The self-enclosed person with a mirror on the inside of his bubble and armor against information outside.

I'm really bad.

Let me tell you about my "bubble." I used to believe that physician assisted suicide (PAS) was literally "the way to go." I read Prescription Medicide by Jack Kevorkian and agreed with much of it. I even went so far as to phone The Hemlock Society to inquire about PAS. The woman I spoke to was very nice to me, and after listening to my story she gently and kindly talked me out of it. I got the impression that she felt a bit guilty that people were contacting them to ask for help committing suicide.

Anyway, I forgot to ask: Did you come to your conclusions regarding assisted suicide by watching some YouTube videos and/or reading what some people posted about it in an online forum? I'm sincerely concerned that you might make a very serious mistake that I almost made.

 

[Rhea]

Rhea, you're skipping over the issues I raised earlier regarding the character and the credibility of those who espouse assisted death for the dying. I must include you among those I don't believe. I don't trust any of you any farther than I can throw a Mack truck. Posting a lot of assertions won't change my mind.

Aaaah. I see.
It seems like you are here proclaim your truth and decline to even discuss the issue. A one-way communication. You talk, and you choose to do no hearing. You speak without listening. You have my story. You know already what I did and did not do. But you did not hear the story, you call it untrustworthy.

Very well. I hear you and I believe you.

So my further comments on this topic are for those who are here to discuss, and it sounds like that’s not you, Unknown Soldier; so you can continue to ignore my opinions, my story, my posts. For those who have an interest in discussing and exploring this very personal and emotional topic, in order to expand their ability to see how others view it, I shall continue in that conversation with those people. You, unknown soldier, I will no doubt see in court, when you try to take away my rights and I fight you tooth and nail.

…
Back to the discussion of the topic at hand.

A point was raised that those affected are the ones that have a valid story. And indeed that is true, and they are the ones to listen to carefully. Some issues that are of interest:

• The point that the percent of the population that seeks death with dignity, in the face of an unavoidable prognosis, is fairly constant in a wide variety of cultures.
• The point that the laws enacted so far have created a system of checks for the person seeking treatment to change their mind, or to express concerns over coercion.
• The point that there are people who make the choice in advance and put their wishes in writing.

Several states in the US and european countries have enacted laws that permit people to choose the manner of their death and avoid the torture of terminal disease. Are those laws well written? Are there cases of people rescued from mis-application? I know there are cases of those prevented from using the laws, so there is definitely some error-on-the-side-of-extending-life that is occurring. I’m sure that by now there are analyses of how these laws are working.

 

[abaddon]

I'm really bad.

As usual you miss the point. I was commenting on your epistemic standard.

... The woman I spoke to was very nice to me, and after listening to my story she gently and kindly talked me out of it. I got the impression that she felt a bit guilty that people were contacting them to ask for help committing suicide.

Gosh what a surprise, it's yet another jab by you against your own argument.

Anyway, I forgot to ask: Did you come to your conclusions regarding assisted suicide by watching some YouTube videos and/or reading what some people posted about it in an online forum? I'm sincerely concerned that you might make a very serious mistake that I almost made.

I've been thinking about how to die for most of my adult life. Then watching my mother die of a brain tumor made it clearer how imperative it is to have a plan. If diagnosed with anything that'll destroy my mind or cause me to suffer a locked-in state, I intend to kill myself -- with help or without it. I'd prefer a physician to help, to be more sure that I don't screw it up.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

I'm really bad.

As usual you miss the point. I was commenting on your epistemic standard.

No. You called me a name out of frustration with my not agreeing with you. That kind of behavior reminds me of religious fundamentalists I've debated who take shots at me when they realize I'm an unbeliever. Fundamentalism can evidently impact the nonreligious as well as the religious.

... The woman I spoke to was very nice to me, and after listening to my story she gently and kindly talked me out of it. I got the impression that she felt a bit guilty that people were contacting them to ask for help committing suicide.

Gosh what a surprise, it's yet another jab by you against your own argument.

I'm very open to goodness in people whatever they might believe.

Anyway, I forgot to ask: Did you come to your conclusions regarding assisted suicide by watching some YouTube videos and/or reading what some people posted about it in an online forum? I'm sincerely concerned that you might make a very serious mistake that I almost made.

I've been thinking about how to die for most of my adult life. Then watching my mother die of a brain tumor made it clearer how imperative it is to have a plan. If diagnosed with anything that'll destroy my mind or cause me to suffer a locked-in state,

OK, then you didn't arrive at you position on this issue by watching videos and debating people in a forum. Why then should I agree with your position by watching videos and believing what abusive people say in a forum? That's a blatant double standard.

Anyway, your testimony is typical of what euthanasia supporters say: Relative A had condition B, and I'd rather die than have condition B. Of course, the assumption is that dying is preferable to having condition B. That assumption might not be true.

I intend to kill myself -- with help or without it. I'd prefer a physician to help, to be more sure that I don't screw it up.

I've heard stories of "screwed up" suicide attempts. One girl ended up permanently blind as a result of her suicide attempt. That's the kind of insanity I want to prevent.

A much better idea is to see a doctor to discuss disease and disability prevention as well as palliative care.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Rhea, you're skipping over the issues I raised earlier regarding the character and the credibility of those who espouse assisted death for the dying. I must include you among those I don't believe. I don't trust any of you any farther than I can throw a Mack truck. Posting a lot of assertions won't change my mind.

Aaaah. I see.
It seems like you are here proclaim your truth and decline to even discuss the issue. A one-way communication. You talk, and you choose to do no hearing. You speak without listening. You have my story. You know already what I did and did not do. But you did not hear the story, you call it untrustworthy.

Very well. I hear you and I believe you.

So my further comments on this topic are for those who are here to discuss, and it sounds like that’s not you, Unknown Soldier; so you can continue to ignore my opinions, my story, my posts. For those who have an interest in discussing and exploring this very personal and emotional topic, in order to expand their ability to see how others view it, I shall continue in that conversation with those people. You, unknown soldier, I will no doubt see in court, when you try to take away my rights and I fight you tooth and nail.

…
Back to the discussion of the topic at hand.

A point was raised that those affected are the ones that have a valid story. And indeed that is true, and they are the ones to listen to carefully. Some issues that are of interest:

• The point that the percent of the population that seeks death with dignity, in the face of an unavoidable prognosis, is fairly constant in a wide variety of cultures.
• The point that the laws enacted so far have created a system of checks for the person seeking treatment to change their mind, or to express concerns over coercion.
• The point that there are people who make the choice in advance and put their wishes in writing.

Several states in the US and european countries have enacted laws that permit people to choose the manner of their death and avoid the torture of terminal disease. Are those laws well written? Are there cases of people rescued from mis-application? I know there are cases of those prevented from using the laws, so there is definitely some error-on-the-side-of-extending-life that is occurring. I’m sure that by now there are analyses of how these laws are working.

I can't blame you for avoiding the issue of the crazy posts from the supporters of your cause on this thread. I would be ashamed of them too if they supported my position!

As for me, I believe I will get involved in the group, Not Dead Yet. They seem to be serious about protecting the lives of the disabled from death fundamentalists. In addition to my making donations to Not Dead Yet, I can meet with legislators to let them know why I feel threatened by assisted murder.