Friday, June 09, 2017

Do you own my life?

This is the question to be put to all of the anti voluntary euthanasia  stalwarts who will emerge over the coming months.

Thank goodness David Seymour's bill has been pulled from the ballot.

That's all from me.


Redbaiter said...

"Do you own my life?"

So you cheer for young people who wish to commit suicide?

macdoctor said...

My reply to your question is: "Do you own my conscience?"

Anonymous said...

It;s legalised suicide, sounds dangerous. Suicide is self murder, murder is wrong.
It's a slippery slope indeed, and people will be encouraged to take their lives for all sorts of reasons. Just another word for suicide, it's morally wrong.

Lindsay Mitchell said...

Macdoctor, No I don't own your conscience any more than I own your life. I am not asking you to do anything that goes against your conscience either. I, unlike the antagonists who will fight this by any means (eg the outlandish suggestion that this is ACT's free market solution to healthcare), am not trying to change your mind. Just leave me the right to make my own decisions.

Redbaiter said...

I regard the term "voluntary euthanasia" as a typically Progressive euphemism.

Its really just suicide. People killing themselves. We abhor this in the young. Why then would we embrace it in the old?

In fact there are many reasonable arguments against it, ethical and practical, that I won't go into here. However the leading consideration is whether the state should be encouraging suicide in any form, in the old or the young.

Especially with the current leftist social pressure aimed at framing the elderly as morally disposable. ("Old white men" for example.)

Or the idea that pensioners are draining the nation's coffers and reducing its prosperity.

There may be a reasonable case to be made for killing one's self, if the unbearable pain from a fatal disease cannot be suppressed for example.

However its not as simple as "Do you own my life", an overly simplistic doctrinal statement/ question that is pretty typical of the attitudes that made me quickly lose faith in Libertarianism as the answer to any of the West's political/ social problems.

1) Would you accede to a young person taking their life if they suddenly developed that obsession? Would you stand watching as they jumped off Auckland Harbour Bridge for example? Would you tell them- "Go ahead, its your life"?

2) Allowing the state to become an interested party in suicide is actually a very dangerous notion.

I do not cheer for it.

Anonymous said...

Red - "voluntary" euthanasia is absolutely key to any real benefit reform.

Personal responsibility: why would you NOT accede to a middle-aged person who was terminally ill, in chronic pain, or who had lost their job, had no savings, massive debts, no credit and who refused to take largess from taxpayers taking responsibility for themselves at last.

Red, I can understand why you would NOT want them to jump from the bridge: traffic disruption, disturbing to see someone jump, an expensive search for the body or some other taxpayer finding a corpse washing up on the beach. What do you suggest? Starving to death is painful and long, few people can manage it.

This bill enhances personal responsibility and minimises costs to taxpayers.

Anonymous said...

I think Redbaiter's response to this difficult matter is well reasoned. Having had suicidal periods during deep depression (failed at that as well fortunately) I support the view if you are secular that no one owns your life but that obliges one to take one's own life rather than go into a clinic and have it done for you by a govt regulated clinician. Courage is required to do this in a way that a Liberterian would endorse. I do wonder if the uneasy middle ground we presently have is the least unpleasant option but it will be interesting to see what the debate brings forth. I'd like the emotional blackmail from either side to be left out.


Mark Wahlberg said...

I have been battling cancer for the last four years and while I have suffered despair,I haven't considered euthanasia,but I have shared time with some sane and rational people who have.

With the few terminal patients I have discussed this with, they see it it as a valid option to an inevitable slow agonizing slide into death. This decision is not undertaken as some form of recreational activity. Its a choice made for the most humane of reasons.

Animals are euthanased everyday for humane reasons. Sadly, some feel human beings are not entitled to the same courtesy.

I fail to see the connection between a person making a value judgment while being of sound mind and aware of the consequences of their actions, being compared with someone who takes their own life while labouring With an unbalanced mind.

Everyday somewhere in this world people are being kept alive on life support machines after suffering accidents or other catastrophic events and decisions are made to pull the plug and end life. Why is this any different to terminally ill people wanting to do the same with there own lives?

I haven't reached that point myself, but if I do, I hope I am of sound mind and have the courage to make the right decision, whatever it might be.

Off course this argument involving the terminally ill has also fueled debate over the introduction of medicinal marijuana. Another emotional issue occupying the minds of those controlling the lives of others.

Meanwhile I battle on putting my life in the hands of a system, which at times, I'm not sure is my friend or my enemy.

paul scott said...

I agree with Red, 'voluntary euthenasia' is a regressive euphemism.
I hate to say it but a form euthenasia is practised every day.

Its that business of withholding treatment. >> " Oh your father had a bad reaction to the antibiotics, you will remember last time, is everyone in the family agreed where we are ?...""

Mark Hubbard said...

By Christ I hate bullying, authoritarian, patronising, lying, hypocritical Christian conservatives. Red Baiter and Macdoctor are every bit the contemptible gulag of each other as are the snowflakes they hate. You have no right to be by my bedside. My choice of euthanasia in no way affects yours. F*** off back to your collectivist, primitive caves.

I have no desire for nice debate anymore, and all this is pointless as this basic right is decided by 119 probably unrepresentative people who for some reason get to lord it over us in Wellligton. This should be decided by referendum, not the Catholic head boy and a bloody seminary who live in the 15th century like many on this thread do. Christains are far the biggest wall from my freedom over the mental asylum which is Islam, and are as ludicrous and anathema to free lives and civilised living. Way past time for a Western Spring.

Furious at those who could't undertand an individual right if they tripped over their jackboots.

Apologies, Lindsay. I'm just so angry.

Mark Hubbard said...

By the way, all the best, Mark Walhberg. They're not my responsibility, but sorry for all the Christians, Red, Macdoctor, 3.16, et al, who think you should suffer for their comic book, but very cruel, beliefs. They are the enemy of what is compassionate and human in us.

Mark Hubbard said...

Oh, and to Macdoctor who seems to be under belief state will make him euthanise people, grow up. You are so dishonest in how you approach this topic (here and on Whaleoil).

All euthanasia law does is take the state out of this personal decision, vis a vis, they won't pursue criminal prosecution (so euthanasia can proceed, and person can die with loved ones). After that, to audit and police the safeguards of which there are plenty. Otherwise, every decision made is about human agency.

What particularly is galling is how Christians are using the red herring of arguing what the current bill does not ever encompass, and this starts with MPs O'Connor - seminary trained - and this week Finlayson: all David's bill allows is someone with a terminal illness within twelve months of death being able to choose death with dignity, and for that they have to be of sound mind to convince two independent doctors.

This bill is about nothing else, you contemptible, infantile, deeply flawed and dishonest God-squad bastards.

Redbaiter said...

Sorry Mark, but I've no interest in debating this with someone as irrational and emotional as yourself. I must have told you five or six times over the years I'm agnostic, but your bigotry is apparently so overpowering its something you prefer to forget.

I do support Christians and Christianity as an important and valuable part of our heritage and cultural development. I admire them for their faith especially in the hostile environment today, as generated by dogmatic progressives such as yourself.

Good luck with your crusade. I doubt you'll convince anyone to support you with such an intemperate approach. And please don't bother me on Twitter. I like it there because I don't need to pay attention to abusive and irrational progressives or put up with the arbitrary judgments of blog owners. I don't want to block you but I will if you persist.

I've said my piece on this issue.

Mark Hubbard said...

Red, this is your first comment on this thread:

Quote: 'So you cheer for young people who wish to commit suicide?'

Conflating the tragedy of youth suicide with a person who chooses relief from a terminal illness within 12 months of death, is disgraceful. You're a bullying piece of s***. I wouldn't want to live in a society where you get to make the rules with your patronising authoritarian cronies. You disgust me.

Mark Hubbard said...

And calling me a progressive is far more absurd than calling you a Christian because every value you espouse is from the monastery the rest of the old blokes on this thread are preaching from.

In fact, the case against euthanasia is so dishonest, I doubt your word calling yourself agnostic. That's par for the course with most Christians in this debate.

Mark Hubbard said...

Finally Red, you directed that question at Lindsay, which is something much more evil than bad faith.

Don W said...

Redbaiter, My eldest daughter attempted suicide a week ago. It had nothing to do with euthanasia. Euthanasia and suicide are two totally different scenarios.

Lindsay Mitchell said...

Don, That must be harrowing for you. Hard to imagine but hopefully some good will come of a failed attempt. I do know from my own family experience that getting professional help is nigh on impossible. In fact I was told via GP that a young person has to actually attempt suicide (not just threaten) before they will got on a list for 'counselling' treatment. I wish you and your daughter the best.

Don W said...

Thanks Lindsay
She had a few days in Henry Bennett, It is one day at at time at this stage.

Lindsay Mitchell said...

Do you mind if I inquire how old she is? Send me a private email if you'd prefer.

Don W said...

Early 30s

Mark Hubbard said...

Don: all the best for your daughter, and family. Hope it works out.

Don W said...

Thanks Mark