Assisted suicide - thought?

Discussion in 'Science & Society' started by High Voltage Blonde, Mar 1, 2012.

  1. wynn ˙ Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,058
    Can't stop displaying your contempt, eh? Perhaps you should quit trolling while you still have a shred of dignity left.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. wynn ˙ Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,058
    That's just childish of you to say.

    In the US, a citizen can contact their representative in the US Congress and express their concern, or start a political party or other political action. These are your rights, guaranteed by the US Constitution.

    To take your wrath, disgust and other negativity out on others who are not related to any political institution or function under the same jurisdiction as your, when for you there exists a real way to deal with the issue (ie. contacting your representative in the US Congress and express your concern, or start a political party or other political action) is just misguided and immature.


    (And I'm not American, by the way.)
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Stoniphi obscurely fossiliferous Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,256
    Agreed.

    That is not the only thing that you are not.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    It's a complaint voiced increasingly by the oldest people in the country. While some of us are undoubtedly already suffering dementia, it is rather insulting of you to accuse all of us of being childish simply because we would like to be allowed to take control over our own lives.
    You made that obvious in your preceding paragraph. Only someone who has not lived under our system would be so naive about it!

    As I noted earlier, much of our legal system seems to have been designed for the purpose of training people to "think outside the box," i.e., to develop creative ways of circumventing rules in order to enjoy freedom and prosperity despite the increasingly restrictive rules. Speed limits, drug prohibition, zoning restrictions, licensing laws, income tax...

    This is why many immigrants from certain much older, much longer-established countries are so astoundingly successful in America. They've spent hundreds of years developing ways to "beat the system" and they think we're fools for even pretending to conform to it.

    The Baby Boomers (Americans born between 1946 and 1964, the first post-WWII generation and qualitatively larger than the ones that came before) have been finding ways to beat the system since adolescence. As soon as these end-of-life issues begin to loom larger in their world view, they'll find a way to beat them too.

    Eventually the laws catch up, but it can take an entire generation or even longer.
     
  8. wynn ˙ Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,058
    Clearly, this is not what I referred to as "childish."

    I was very clear:

    -

    In the US, a citizen can contact their representative in the US Congress and express their concern, or start a political party or other political action. These are your rights, guaranteed by the US Constitution.

    To take your wrath, disgust and other negativity out on others who are not related to any political institution or function under the same jurisdiction as your, when for you there exists a real way to deal with the issue (ie. contacting your representative in the US Congress and express your concern, or start a political party or other political action) is just misguided and immature.

    -



    I think this above is a very cynical, so much so that it is an immature view for a citizen to hold.
    If this is what the US culture is essentially about, then it is no suprise that the situation there is progressively worsening. So much bad faith!

    Like the saying goes - Citizens get the country that they deserve.
     
  9. wynn ˙ Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,058
    And yet throughout this whole thread, until now, you have simply assumed that I am American (although often in discussions, I point out that I am not), and argued from there. This is a very bad practice on a forum that you know is international.
     
  10. wynn ˙ Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,058
    Likewise.
     
  11. Arioch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,274
    @wynn --

    You haven't answered a single question you've been asked in this thread. I, personally, have asked you two or three questions to which I've gotten literally zero response, and they weren't irrelevant questions. Before you try to get all "high and mighty" on me, perhaps you should look at exactly why I'm responding to you in the way that I am.

    I thought that you were supposed to be spiritual? And I was under the impression that part of "spirituality" was self-reflection(I know it's a part of my spirituality)? How did that scripture go? Something like "take the plank out of your own eye before attempting to remove the speck from your brother's". Something like that anyways.

    Given how you've acted and the fact that you've not made one salient point in this entire thread, I'm perfectly justified in treating you with contempt. You've earned that much.

    Now, are you going to answer the questions? Or are you going to continue trolling?
     
  12. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    I've already spoken to your sweet, naive foreigner's fantasy about what life must be like in the paradise of the United States. It just doesn't work that way. All three branches of our government have been using the Constitution for toilet paper since the administration of Franklin Roosevelt, before I was born.
    Yet here you sit, spreading your paternalistic attitude to the members of SciForums, the majority of whom are Americans. As I said in an earlier post, you have a right to do this, but I also have a right to be angry at you and to insult you for attempting to spread a political (and, I still insist, almost surely religious) philosophy that has an extremely detrimental impact on my own life.
    Oh put a sock in it! Your naivete about my country is as silly as Sam's. Did you, too, spend a couple of years here sequestered in a university environment, believing that you were absorbing everything you needed to know about America? Why do you think that our politics should be any different from those in any other modern, successful, cosmopolitan industrial country? The UK, France, Germany, Japan, they're all democracies but in all of them it takes a generation or more for a major shift in popular opinion to have a serious impact on their laws.

    As for "starting a political party," you must be joking. Admittedly, other modern countries have multi-party politics, but ours has always been a duality. Third parties remain curiosities until some cataclysmic event causes one half of the two-party system to collapse. The last time that happened was during the Civil War 160 years ago, and the cataclysm was the ending of slavery.

    We've been members of the Libertarian Party almost since it was formed, we dutifully contribute to and vote for their candidates, and I can assure you that as a professional writer I have had my share of letters-to-the-editor published, expressing the libertarian position on key issues like drugs, immigration, undeclared preemptive war, support for Israel, and the effective nationalization of the education, charity, healthcare, energy, transportation, and various other industries. In three decades we've gotten nowhere. The press consistently brands Libertarians as nut jobs, even though we take our principles from Thomas Jefferson, one of our most revered presidents.

    The American Communist Party is the only third party that's had a major impact on American politics. They never won an election above the municipal level, but in the 1920s enough of their candidates won seats on small city councils and county boards that the major parties started to worry. So they simply began to co-opt their platform. What a victory for the Communists, right? Maybe so, except that it took a whole generation for the change to be felt. President Eisenhower, ironically a Republican (the so-called "conservative" party), created the Department of Health, Education and Welfare, thereby completing the enshrinement of the entire 1929 Communist Party Platform into U.S. law.

    The Green Party takes second place in this contest. Their presidential candidate, Ralph Nader, made a strong showing in the 2000 presidential election. Since most environmentally sensitive voters are Democrats (the so-called "liberal" party), his votes resulted in Al Gore, the Democratic candidate, losing a very close election. So, ironically, George Bush, a flaming Redneck conservative suffering from pre-senile dementia, got control of the country. At least the Communists eventually got much of what they wanted, at least those who were still alive. The Greens sabotaged their own program.

    Your point is well taken, that starting a movement is a reasonable way to promote an agenda, but a third party is not the best way to do it. As I've already said, the multitude of Baby Boomers have started a new movement at every milestone in their lives, from rock'n'roll to civil rights to motorcycles to pacifism to feminism to drugs to the Sexual Revolution to SUVs to the banning of transfats. Now that they're getting old, they'll be the ones to overthrow the tyranny of the nannies who forbid us to take control over our own end-of-life issues.
    You're the one who doesn't think I should be allowed to make my own decisions about the end of my life, but I'm the one who's misguided? You're the one who sounds exactly like a religionist--a philosophy from the Stone Age that most closely resembles belief in the Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny--and I'm the one who's immature?
    How the hell would you know, living in Canada or Scotland or Holland or Denmark or India or Japan or some foreign country where everyone has learned perfect English? It's one thing to express an outsider's opinion on America's military policy, which has a highly visible impact on huge swaths of this planet and may even have killed members of your family if you happen to be writing from, say, Pakistan. It's quite another to pretend to the same expertise about a much more subtle issue such as the ways our citizens can or cannot influence our government.
    You're making a fool of yourself. Some of our most mature, respected journalists and educators agree with me.

    I'll be the first to interrupt myself and say that America is a pretty nice place and our system of government works a lot better than in many other countries that are regarded as democracies, such as Mexico and South Korea. Nonetheless, one of the freedoms we have is the freedom to complain, and we complain vociferously about unfair treatment. My entire generation is being treated unfairly by a government that has institutionalized the morality of a religion for which I have nothing but contempt, precisely because its members believe they are better than I am and therefore get to make rules for me. So I complain.
    As I said, you know virtually nothing about U.S. culture. You'd learn more by watching Jon Stewart.
     
  13. wynn ˙ Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,058
    I am not naive. I just don't share your immature and cynical attitude toward politics and being a citizen.

    :shrug:
     
  14. wynn ˙ Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,058
    Reported.
     
  15. Stoniphi obscurely fossiliferous Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,256
    One problem with being a "poser" is no-one believes anything you say after a while.

    Do you report everyone whom you disagree with or just those who ask you pointed questions?

    You seem very angry much of the time - why is that? ESL?
     
  16. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    I continue to suggest that you all be kinder to wynn. As moderator I'm quite familiar with the phenomenon of trolling and his posts just don't qualify.
    On the other hand, I agree that hitting the Report button on these posts is extremely poor sportsmanship. We're all being reasonably tolerant, despite our impatience with his failure to support his points satisfactorily. He should respond with equal courtesy to our exasperation over these failures.
    Given his refusal to answer that question, as I said my reasoned guess is that this issue touches a nerve.

    As I've pointed out, it also touches one of mine but I've done you all the courtesy of explaining why. It's time for him to treat us with equal courtesy.

    Wynn: Why is this issue so important to you that it interferes with the rationality of your discourse? It's time to stop ducking this question and ANSWER IT.
    A cheap shot unless you're serious, and you can't be serious since his English is much too good to be a second language. Even most educated Indians who have been speaking English since they were six can't write this well. Fareed Zakaria is a high-profile exception, but although he speaks our language impeccably we have no idea how much editing his writing may undergo before we see the exquisite published version.
     
  17. wynn ˙ Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,058
    Do you know what projection is, in psychology?
     
  18. garbonzo Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    790
    So how is it that Adstar and that Knowledge guy gets banned but not wynn, who is a very similiar troll? He keeps going around in circles and never makes a valid point. Just like the "Hubble telescope proves creation" thread.

    No one can dictate another person's life while that person is conscious. I don't care what it is. You can give them advice, but you cant control them. If they want to do something, they do it! Why the hell is it any different for suicides? If the person says they want it, then do it! What's the problem here? People cut themselves intentionally all the time. I don't see anyone saying to make it illegal. WTF? PEOPLE CAN DO ANYTHING THEY WANT TO. Even if its stupid. Why is it any different for assisted suicide??????
     
  19. Stoniphi obscurely fossiliferous Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,256
    I have encountered folks online working in PRC computer cafe sweatshops whose' English was very good - that is why the PRC gave them the job. Cultural intolerance is a flag, skill with the English language notwithstanding. Persistent intolerance of my Buddhist practice and baiting attempts concerning your' wife's practice raises questions of motivation.

    So to answer your' question - no, I do not know whether he is or is not a native English speaker. :shrug: ESL would at least offer an excuse for not understanding the nuance of these conversations and the frequent dust - ups that result from that.

    Now this ^ is more along the lines of how a troll responds to a direct question. He sidesteps your' question and instead infers that you are "projecting" while responding to your question with a question. The implication is then that you have a problem but refuse to acknowledge it, instead perceiving that problem in him. This move is meant to put you on the defensive while inferring that he has a superior knowledge of psychology in his arsenal.

    There is a dotted line between participating in a discussion and saying things to get others riled up, upset, hurt or angry. A troll straddles that line at best and crosses it as often as possible. The behavior becomes a pattern that is easily discernible after a while.

    As for kindness, honestly speaking the truth as I perceive and understand it is compassionate in my view, and compassion is the embodiment of kindness. I encourage everyone to be open and honest with everyone else.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  20. chimpkin C'mon, get happy! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,416
    For the record, Wynn has never struck me as a troll.

    However I note this thread seems to be derailing into bickering...

    My main worry about assisted suicide is not the assisted suicide itself, but our abysmally-managed for-profit system.

    It's much cheaper to stall, stall, stall on treatment until the person really IS terminal, then hand them 50$ worth of opiates to overdose and kill themselves on.

    Would our insurers do that? SURE!
     
  21. Arioch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,274
    @wynn --

    For what violation of the rules did you report me? So far as I know, despite my slightly bitter and exasperated tone, there were no infractions in my posts. Sure, I've called you a troll, but that's because I recognize in your patterns of behavior many troll-like qualities(the constant tendency to derail threads, the absolute refusal to support assertions, the defensive reaction to any sort of confrontation, the projection of your own behaviors onto others in the thread, your stark refusal to admit that you're ever wrong, I could go on and on) and I'm one who's not afraid to call a spade a spade.

    I haven't reported you yet because while I see you as a troll(from my years of experience in dealing with them), you have a knack for hiding your trollish content in a web of words designed to fend off mods. This isn't the first time I've encountered such behavior, and I know it won't be the last, but that doesn't mean that I have to just sit back and let you go on unchallenged.

    Your implication through your posts that I and others are projecting when we accuse you of simply not answering many of the questions you've been asked is disingenuous and flatly contradicted by the content of this and many other threads. Personally I dislike your stance in this thread and think, with good and documented reasons, that you're full of shit in that regard. However when have I ever done anything but ask, and then demand, that you support the many assertions you've made in this thread? That's all I've asked of you and yet you've consistently responded either with defensive contempt(I seem to remember a saying about people in glass houses here) or simply by ignoring me. This suggests that you simply can not defend your position and simply wish it to be accepted on the strength of your emotions for it, and that simply won't happen.

    So let me ask you again. Is a person who is terminally ill harming another person if they decide to don a gas hood?
     
  22. Arioch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,274
    @Fraggle --

    I'll treat Wynn with more kindness when her behavior begins to warrant it, until then I'll respond with the contempt and ridicule that her unintelligible positions warrant. I can have a civilised conversation even with people who I vehemently disagree with so long as they're willing to engage in the conversation and it's not this one-way crap that I get from Wynn and others. However once the insults(such as the claim that I have "rotting morals"), the "high and mighty" behavior, and the obstinate refusal to answer questions begins, then the people have lost any right they may have had to expect kind words from me.
     
  23. chimpkin C'mon, get happy! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,416
    Well, the people who assist would get charged with murder.
    Doctors who hand out an LD of pills can't legally do that.
    Were I dying and in a lot of pain, I'd love to sip myself away on one of these:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brompton_cocktail

    As far as cutting, people will freak out if they catch you at it and try to have you locked up.
     

Share This Page