Originally posted by King Kandy
Oh, OK. I guess if you have a fatal degenerative illness you should just decide to get better like a real man.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
You don't have the right to take your own live unless you can show that the remainder of your short life will be filled with pain that cannot be managed.
And only then must you ask your family for their blessing. There is a correct reason and correct way to take your life.
Originally posted by Lord Lucien
No, but I think you are. Calling a suicide selfish I agree with, but to actually demand persistence for your sake is equally self-centered.
What do I have to do with it? I'm talking about the family. You are a member of your family. You do not have a right to hurt your family any more then they have a right to hurt you. Committing suicide hurts your family in the worst way possible.
Originally posted by ShakyamunisonYes, it does. Suicide without good cause is incredibly selfish and cowardly. But you saying: "... it is better to live a terrable life for the sake of others," is not compassionate, nor merciful. I know that if I were witness to the suffering of someone so close---note: suffering. Actual pain (physical and mental). I.e. terminal illness, horrible wounds, traumatic experience, whatever---and it was irrecoverable, I'd want to see it ended. I'd see that what could be done to help them was done, but if nothing worked and they never shook out of their stupor, I'd not condemn them for wanting to end it. I'd lament it, I'd want them to reconsider, I'd be desperate if it was someone so close to me... but I would never demand it. I despise people who use use guilt as a tool for their own purposes. What would be the point in continuing their agony if it was to comfort others? Who are these people who take such pleasure from one who suffers?
What do I have to do with it? I'm talking about the family. You are a member of your family. You do not have a right to hurt your family any more then they have a right to hurt you. Committing suicide hurts your family in the worst way possible.
Regardless of whether you agree with their reasons for contemplating death, there is something wrong with them. And if nothing works (nothing--I emphasize the word), I'd not be the tyrant who demand they prolong their life because their presence makes me feel better.
Originally posted by King Kandy
Here, hopefully this is easier to understand:You usually are AGAINST people telling people they have to live their lives a certain way in the religion forum, but you are doing the same thing here.
I see. I'm not talking about something written in an old book. I'm talking about law. If you try to commit suicide, you will get arrested. In the state of Oregon, we have an assisted suicide law, but concealing is involved.
Originally posted by Lord Lucien
Yes, it does. Suicide without good cause is incredibly selfish and cowardly. But you saying: "... it is better to live a terrable life for the sake of others," is not compassionate, nor merciful. I know that if I were witness to the suffering of someone so close---note: suffering. Actual pain (physical and mental). I.e. terminal illness, horrible wounds, traumatic experience, whatever---and it was irrecoverable, I'd want to see it ended. I'd see that what could be done to help them was done, but if nothing worked and they never shook out of their stupor, I'd not condemn them for wanting to end it. I'd lament it, I'd want them to reconsider, I'd be desperate if it was someone so close to me... but I would never demand it. I despise people who use use guilt as a tool for their own purposes. What would be the point in continuing their agony if it was to comfort others? Who are these people who take such pleasure from one who suffers?Regardless of whether you agree with their reasons for contemplating death, there is something wrong with them. And if nothing works ([b]nothing
--I emphasize the word), I'd not be the tyrant who demand they prolong their life because their presence makes me feel better. [/B]
Please review, I did. You will see that you are going way off base. It is better to live a terrible life for the sake of others, but that is not to say that a terminally ill person should not have the right to take their life. We were talking about a kid who wanted to talk about suicide because his parents are abusive. In the case of this thread, it is better to live this temporary hell, then to commit suicide. Even in the extreme case that you mentioned, if the terminally ill person wants to live a terrible life for the sake of others, they have that right. It would be wrong to condemn then for holding on.
Originally posted by King Kandy
I live in oregon and am aware of that... however that is not relevant because your argument so far was about whether it was MORAL not whether it was LEGAL.
I gave my moral point of view, and it's completely different.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Life and death are both attachments. Suicide is also an attachment. From the Buddhist point of view, if you commit suicide, then you simply return to the same life condition the you started with. If suffering is the choice you made for this life, then suffering will be the choice you make for the next life. You will continue this cycle until you have achieved the goal you set out to achieve in the first place.
From the beginning, I said you don’t have the right. What do you think I was talking about?
Originally posted by ShakyamunisonYou are right then. The kid who has abusive parents is better off killing the parents than himself.
Please review, I did. You will see that you are going way off base. It is better to live a terrible life for the sake of others, but that is not to say that a terminally ill person should not have the right to take their life. We were talking about a kid who wanted to talk about suicide because his parents are abusive. In the case of this thread, it is better to live this temporary hell, then to commit suicide. Even in the extreme case that you mentioned, if the terminally ill person wants to live a terrible life for the sake of others, they have that right. It would be wrong to condemn then for holding on.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I gave my moral point of view, and it's completely different.From the beginning, I said you don’t have the right. What do you think I was talking about?
My point is, you are trying to tell people that there is a certain way they must live their life, which is a position you usually disagree with in all other contexts.