Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

kcast2818 t1_je6xxk9 wrote

Assisted suicide? No thanks

−31

Cerberus73 t1_je6zj8o wrote

Nobody is asking you to do it, but don't take that choice away from others.

14

kcast2818 t1_je73jcm wrote

We live in a society. The person asked a question.

−10

Avocadoexpresss OP t1_je77rxz wrote

You don’t believe that someone with a short life sentence, in a state of suffering, should get to decide for themselves when they are done fighting their illness? This isn’t a bill that just allows anyone to access life ending medication.

6

kcast2818 t1_je79dgj wrote

Do you really think they're gonna stop at the terminally ill? They are gonna expand it to anyone who feels like ending it all. "Its their choice none of your bees wax" is a ridiculously simplistic defense of it too.

−11

Avocadoexpresss OP t1_je79xo2 wrote

Just look at the states that have it legalised currently. Some have provided this service for 20 years and none have changed their parameters to allow mental illness. Only terminal illness.

5

kcast2818 t1_je7amdb wrote

Correct changed their parameters..expect more of this as it becomes normalized. Next thing you know kids will be decide to end it all without parental consent cuz they felt like it.

−1

Carpeteria3000 t1_je7g8j9 wrote

Livin’ wild on the slippery slope over here

9

kcast2818 t1_je7kg32 wrote

Slippery slope has happened on a bunch of issues. They're literally pushing assisted suicide in Canada for mental illness not just the terminally ill. Maybe you're not paying attenetion.

1

Carpeteria3000 t1_je7laaf wrote

I’m literally not living in Canada, and “pushing for” something doesn’t mean it will happen. Lots of laws get “pushed for” across the country. Doesn’t automatically make them happen.

The DwD law has existed for over 20 years in Oregon and no slopes have been slid in that time. It has been legalized in several other states since then, and amazingly, the laws have held fast and far fewer terminal patients have actually taken advantage of these acts than doomsdayers projected.

5

kcast2818 t1_je7mvsw wrote

They have no incentive to continue if other states have not followed in assisted suicide. Now that its gaining steam in the US expect Oregon to take the next step. Massachusetts passed gay marriage in 2004 other states followed. Now its national. Now we're discussing Trans kids. See how this works?

1

Carpeteria3000 t1_je7n1wv wrote

Nope. You’re talking out of your ass and that’s a massive false equivalency. You’re really good at tossing around fallacies, though.

3

kcast2818 t1_je7pp5m wrote

Yeah can't properly respond just name call and have a fit. Enjoy your echo chamber.

1

Carpeteria3000 t1_je7qi2z wrote

I didn’t call you any names. I said you’re talking out of your ass, which is a common phrase for someone throwing around a bunch of nonsense.

Not biting on fallacies =/= echo chamber.

It’s a shame that you’re afraid of something that has no evidence of occurring in this country after literal decades of data and which could help a great deal of your fellow humans who are needlessly suffering while terminal diseases ravage their bodies, while their families have to sit by and watch and while incurring unnecessary medical bills.

2

kcast2818 t1_je7rw3g wrote

I'm not name calling *Proceeds to say talking out of your ass* lol. You never addressed how this isn't a slippery slope. You don't want to have an actual conversation about this because it will lead to topics you don't wanna talk about. Clearly bringing up the gay marriage to trans kids pipeline was your third rail.

Talk to me when you actually want to have a conversation about this not PC nonsense for your Reddit upvotes.

1

Carpeteria3000 t1_je7tkb6 wrote

Umm ok? Name calling would be me saying “You’re an idiot.” I didn’t.

You’re definitely making a slippery slope fallacy.

You’re claiming that, despite there being over 20 years of data related to the law being safely enacted and protected here in the US, that somehow we’re just going to backpedal and start expanding DwD to groups not covered under the current laws, even though you have zero evidence of that being discussed in any real or likely manner by anyone with the power to expand those laws. Your evidence so far is that in Canada (a different country) it’s being “pushed for” - pushed how? By who? How likely is it to happen? Is it on a ballot? And again, even if Canada decided to expand on it, we aren’t discussing Canadian policies. This is America, where these laws have been pretty strictly adhered to in the few states where it has been legalized.

Making the bizarre equivalent between this topic and gay/trans rights, which has literally nothing to do with this issue, is a totally illogical connection and does nothing for the supposed points you’re trying to hammer.

2

Avocadoexpresss OP t1_je7cr6r wrote

So over a hypothetical, the terminally ill and suffering don’t deserve the mercy they seek? I think the states that allow it are a good example of what to expect. Currently watching someone die very painfully, who wishes for the ability to peacefully go. Living in pain and misery, draining all the money she saved within her lifetime for subpar treatment. Let’s hope neither you nor I have to experience this to extend the appropriate compassion.

2