What Is Dignity?

[betsy]

13 hours ago, BubberMiley said:

So then what difference does the law make?

I thought that's been explained - review my posts.

[betsy]

14 hours ago, dialamah said:

If a person A signs a document allowing  person B to end his life once predetermined conditions are met, and those conditions are met before person B carries out the assisted suicide, then that would be "euthanasia".  If those conditions aren't met, then there may be a case for murder.

You seem to think that there would be no safeguards, the law would be passed that basically would give carte blanche to anyone to kill anyone for reasons of mercy.   

In Oregon, they have some conditions designed to ensure the person requesting death is doing so of their own free will.  There must be two requests, with a minimim waiting period between them, and a second medical opinion sought from someone neutral among other things.  California has similar requirements, including a requirement that the doctor meet privately with the patient to ensure no coercion.

With these kinds of controls in place, assisted suicide is not going to result in a killing spree of the old and infirm.  

Here's some reading on different countries and how they deal with the issue of euthanasia.

https://lop.parl.ca/Content/LOP/ResearchPublications/2015-116-e.html?cat=law#a11

 

 

How do you know the disabled person wasn't signing under duress?  How do you know if he wasn't manipulated, and "led" psychologically to that decision?   How do you know he wasn't made to think that the only noble way is to not make himself a burden to anyone anymore?

 

If a person is depressed, and he's dependent on others for his basic needs - he's likely to be susceptible to anything. 

Why do we say troubled kids are more susceptible to join gangs, to get abused, to be victimized, to be bullied?

 

Bottom line:  there are disabled people (not only those that are fully dependent on others for their basic needs) who feel threatened by the legislation.  There are others too -  although not disabled at all - who are concerned about the possible consequences for that legislation.

 

 

Like I said, everything starts to seemingly good reasons. 

 

Bubbermiley gave same-sex marriage as an example of the slippery slope that he said did not come true because  no one has LEGALLY wedded an animal.   He's only looking at one possible consequence that was brought up in debates (meaning, others who claim to have been born with a certain orientation would want the same right that will be given to gays).

 

When they were first  arguing for Same Sex marriage - the reason being given for it seemed only fair and good:  they want to be able to have the same benefits (insurance, governmental etc.) that are being given to married heterosexual couples.   Sound so simple.

Heart-rending stories were given, like a gay dying of AIDS wasn't allowed to be visited at the hospital by his partner whom he'd been living with for years, because he's not recognized as  family member.

 

Now, that SSM is legalized, we find that that wasn't the end of it.   We started sliding down the slippery slope.

 

We got LGBTQ _and whatever.  We have issues over religious belief - which are hurting businesses, issues over washrooms, over school curriculums,  frivolous lawsuits etc...,  Check this lawsuit by a gay couple who want to establish a business:

 

Lawsuits over "discrimination against homosexuality" which were done in the past when homosexuality was deemed illegal, seems to be coming, if not here already.

 

Of course, anything that sets PRECEDENT in court rulings,  open up the way for some other groups.

 

 

Edited March 9, 2018 by betsy

[BubberMiley]

2 hours ago, betsy said:

I thought that's been explained - review my posts.

No way. You just start babbling when you lose an argument and say it's all been explained. And then you go for the big fonts and emojis. I'm not falling for that again.

[betsy]

13 minutes ago, BubberMiley said:

No way. You just start babbling when you lose an argument and say it's all been explained. And then you go for the big fonts and emojis. I'm not falling for that again.

<shrug>

Okay.  Bye.

Edited March 9, 2018 by betsy

[dialamah]

3 hours ago, betsy said:

How do you know the disabled person wasn't signing under duress?  How do you know if he wasn't manipulated, and "led" psychologically to that decision?   How do you know he wasn't made to think that the only noble way is to not make himself a burden to anyone anymore?

 

If a person is depressed, and he's dependent on others for his basic needs - he's likely to be susceptible to anything. 

Why do we say troubled kids are more susceptible to join gangs, to get abused, to be victimized, to be bullied?

 

Bottom line:  there are disabled people (not only those that are fully dependent on others for their basic needs) who feel threatened by the legislation.  There are others too -  although not disabled at all - who are concerned about the possible consequences for that legislation.

 

 

Like I said, everything starts to seemingly good reasons. 

 

Bubbermiley gave same-sex marriage as an example of the slippery slope that he said did not come true because  no one has LEGALLY wedded an animal.   He's only looking at one possible consequence that was brought up in debates (meaning, others who claim to have been born with a certain orientation would want the same right that will be given to gays).

 

When they were first  arguing for Same Sex marriage - the reason being given for it seemed only fair and good:  they want to be able to have the same benefits (insurance, governmental etc.) that are being given to married heterosexual couples.   Sound so simple.

Heart-rending stories were given, like a gay dying of AIDS wasn't allowed to be visited at the hospital by his partner whom he'd been living with for years, because he's not recognized as  family member.

 

Now, that SSM is legalized, we find that that wasn't the end of it.   We started sliding down the slippery slope.

 

We got LGBTQ _and whatever.  We have issues over religious belief - which are hurting businesses, issues over washrooms, over school curriculums,  frivolous lawsuits etc...,  Check this lawsuit by a gay couple who want to establish a business:

 

Lawsuits over "discrimination against homosexuality" which were done in the past when homosexuality was deemed illegal, seems to be coming, if not here already.

 

Of course, anything that sets PRECEDENT in court rulings,  open up the way for some other groups.

 

 

That seemed a bit of a hodge podge, but let me see if I got the main gist of it.

People are concerned about assisted suicide because they are worried about:

1. People with mental challenges being manipulated into signing documents calling for their own death;

2.  Troubled kids being manipulated into signing documents calling for their own death;

3. The proof of this slippery slope is gay marriage: first they just wanted to get married, and now they want bakeries to provide food for their nuptials.

4. A California court ruled against a gay couple who wanted a particular bakery to provide a special wedding cake.

5.  Gay people who don't want to be discriminated against will be bringing lawsuits.

This is why assisted suicide is a bad idea.

Do I have that about right?

Edited March 9, 2018 by dialamah

[betsy]

28 minutes ago, dialamah said:

That seemed a bit of a hodge podge, but let me see if I got the main gist of it.

People are concerned about assisted suicide because they are worried about:

1. People with mental challenges being manipulated into signing documents calling for their own death;

2.  Troubled kids being manipulated into signing documents calling for their own death;

3. The proof of this slippery slope is gay marriage: first they just wanted to get married, and now they want bakeries to provide food for their nuptials.

4. A California court ruled against a gay couple who wanted a particular bakery to provide a special wedding cake.

5.  Gay people who don't want to be discriminated against will be bringing lawsuits.

This is why assisted suicide is a bad idea.

Do I have that about right?

 

Just so to be clear:    The gay marriage isn't the proof of THIS particular issue - assisted suicide.

SSM was given as an example of a slippery slope that came from the SSM legislation.

Edited March 9, 2018 by betsy

[dialamah]

26 minutes ago, betsy said:

 

Just so to be clear:    The gay marriage isn't the proof of THIS particular issue - assisted suicide.

SSM was given as an example of a slippery slope that came from the SSM legislation.

So in your mind, the slippery slope is that gay people first wanted to get married, and now they don't want to be refused service because they are getting married?    I'm finding it difficult to see the logic in this.

Edited March 9, 2018 by dialamah

[betsy]

50 minutes ago, dialamah said:

So in your mind, the slippery slope is that gay people first wanted to get married, and now they don't want to be refused service because they are getting married?    I'm finding it difficult to see the logic in this.

I can't help you.  Sorry.

Edited March 9, 2018 by betsy

[dialamah]

6 minutes ago, betsy said:

I can't help you.  Sorry.

Thats ok, I know you are doing your best.  If you are able to come up with a logical explanation at some point, I would be interested in reading it.

[JamesHackerMP]

Wasn't this post originally about dying with dignity? Hence the question, what is dignity?

[betsy]

23 hours ago, JamesHackerMP said:

Wasn't this post originally about dying with dignity? Hence the question, what is dignity?

It's about what we understand by the term, "dignity."  What is dignity.    Read my OP.

Edited May 4, 2018 by betsy