My right to death with dignity at 29

Discussion in 'Health & Life Counseling' started by FordGT90Concept, Oct 7, 2014.

  1. FordGT90Concept

    FordGT90Concept Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2009
    Messages:
    28,171 (9.90/day)
    Likes Received:
    774
    Location:
    IA, USA
    Nay, sir! Not under the law. Right to life, not death. Doctors take an oath to bring people back from the brink of death, not help people pass on when their time has come.

    People are institutionalized for attempted suicide as further proof of this. The government goes to great lengths to make it difficult for you to intentionally off yourself. Medical providers even more so but that may be due to fear of litigation and medical malpractice (again, see Jack Kavorkian) than doing what is best for the patient.
     
    Last edited: Oct 8, 2014
  2. Papahyooie

    Papahyooie Active Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2009
    Messages:
    2,087 (0.74/day)
    Likes Received:
    10
    That's exactly what I'm saying. A right "under the law" isn't a right at all. Rights don't come from laws made by governments. They come from laws of existence and nature. A government's sole purpose is to restrict behavior, and by proxy, restrict rights. They can't give you rights.

    An able-bodied person, if they want it bad enough, is going to off themselves and there is nothing that anybody can do about it. But there is nothing in nature or existence to suggest that anyone has a natural right to any sort of medication. It's a luxury. So nobody is restricting rights here. 5 states may afford you the luxury, but there is no basic right that exists.

    So what I'm saying is, this woman has taken something that is her inalienable right, and given it to the government, then said that they are restricting rights. It's just comical to me.
     
  3. FordGT90Concept

    FordGT90Concept Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2009
    Messages:
    28,171 (9.90/day)
    Likes Received:
    774
    Location:
    IA, USA
    Meh, you're talking in circles.
     
  4. Papahyooie

    Papahyooie Active Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2009
    Messages:
    2,087 (0.74/day)
    Likes Received:
    10
    Or maybe you don't understand.
     
  5. FordGT90Concept

    FordGT90Concept Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2009
    Messages:
    28,171 (9.90/day)
    Likes Received:
    774
    Location:
    IA, USA
    Or maybe there's the way it is and the way you wish it were. ;)
     
  6. Papahyooie

    Papahyooie Active Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2009
    Messages:
    2,087 (0.74/day)
    Likes Received:
    10
    Or maybe you've never looked past the curtain that's been laid before you. Governments don't give you rights. This is proven by the fact that it's only illegal if you get caught. Naturally, you are a free person. In the absence of government, you are free to do as you please, so your rights do not come from laws. They come from reality, and laws and governments are simply in place to attempt to reign in that freedom. But any criminal will tell you that laws and society are just a fa├žade.

    That's the way it "really is." Freedom is the default. That's why I find it funny that she feels she or anyone else needs to ask permission for her most basic freedom.
     
  7. FordGT90Concept

    FordGT90Concept Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2009
    Messages:
    28,171 (9.90/day)
    Likes Received:
    774
    Location:
    IA, USA
    Oh, so you're saying she should go buy these drugs off the black market?
     
  8. Papahyooie

    Papahyooie Active Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2009
    Messages:
    2,087 (0.74/day)
    Likes Received:
    10
    If they're available, no. But if for some reason you find it necessary to have the drugs, and they aren't available, then sure. But that isn't the point.

    If you want to die badly enough, you'll do it, drugs or no. A running car in the garage is just as peaceful, if you're worried about your family having to clean up the messiness of other methods.

    Regardless, you have a right to death, but to say that a drug is a right is absurd.
     
  9. FordGT90Concept

    FordGT90Concept Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2009
    Messages:
    28,171 (9.90/day)
    Likes Received:
    774
    Location:
    IA, USA
    Never said it was. What I said is that the government shouldn't stand in the way of doctors prescribing drugs that intentionally cause death. The government should heavily regulate it, not forbid it.
     
  10. Papahyooie

    Papahyooie Active Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2009
    Messages:
    2,087 (0.74/day)
    Likes Received:
    10
    I completely agree with that. But the fact is that they do stand in the way. And I think that she's arguing against them standing in the way, by LETTING them stand in the way. It's ironic. Sorry if that's too deep.
     
  11. FordGT90Concept

    FordGT90Concept Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2009
    Messages:
    28,171 (9.90/day)
    Likes Received:
    774
    Location:
    IA, USA
    Yes, it is too deep because you're dragging in the FDA, DEA, DOJ, HHS, and a bunch of other bureaucracies. Look at it from the opposite perspective of the pharmaceutical that makes the drug. Fundamentally, you're insisting that they sell these intentionally lethal drugs to the public. But why would they? By making patients and doctors do the song and dance, they are striped of responsibility so long as they don't fail to work as advertised (a liability all pharmaceuticals carry). If these pharmaceuticals stop producing the drug then all there is left is the black market. The pharmaceutical is leaning on the government to make sure rights aren't treaded on and as a litigation crutch.

    There's a lot of powers at play here because even if the federal government legalizes it, it's no different than abortion in that a lot of doctors will be morally and ethically opposed to doing it. There are probably more doctors willing to prescribe these drugs to terminal patients than willing to perform abortions but I guarantee you there will be a lot that won't touch it.

    Ideologically, the right to death effectively forfeits all other rights especially the 5th amendment ("nor be deprived of life") and if the law isn't worded correctly, the 1st amendment (individual could be comatose).
     
    Last edited: Oct 10, 2014
  12. Papahyooie

    Papahyooie Active Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2009
    Messages:
    2,087 (0.74/day)
    Likes Received:
    10
    I mean too deep philosophically. You are so far out of touch with what I'm saying. I never said anything about any of that. I never insisted that anybody sell anything to anyone.

    I'm simply saying that it's funny that she is complaining about not having the "right" to die, when she is voluntarily giving that right away by acquiescing to the laws, or even attempting to obtain the drug in the first place. Not only has she given her right to death away to the government, she's also given it away to the pharmaceutical company.

    You are reading SO much into my statements that simply isn't there. Let me say again... I AGREE WITH YOU on the legality and regulation.
     
  13. FordGT90Concept

    FordGT90Concept Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2009
    Messages:
    28,171 (9.90/day)
    Likes Received:
    774
    Location:
    IA, USA
    The right to "die with dignity." Peacefully, no nasty mess to clean up, like drug-induced natural death of old age. Her body is presumably going to deny her that right as she says in the article (her body is young and will fight it). Modern medicine is going to give it back to her and the peace of mind that she no longer has to fear the process of dying.

    Hey man, you said "deep" so I went "deep." I could go deeper too. This topic evokes a lot of things which is why I'd rather say "meh, you're talking in circles" than go there.
     
    Last edited: Oct 10, 2014
  14. 3991v

    3991v Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2009
    Messages:
    1,002 (0.35/day)
    Likes Received:
    11
    Location:
    Bradford PA
    Yeah, to throw people who commit victimless "crimes" in jail. It's all about profit.
     
  15. FordGT90Concept

    FordGT90Concept Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2009
    Messages:
    28,171 (9.90/day)
    Likes Received:
    774
    Location:
    IA, USA
    I was talking about the FDA. They verify claims made by pharmaceuticals as well as ensure product consistency so people get what they expect every time they take it.
     
  16. Steevo

    Steevo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2009
    Messages:
    3,982 (1.39/day)
    Likes Received:
    53
    The rest of us mean, what if I wanted to go to a local shop, buy a couple grams of coke, a fifth of jack, and a couple blunts.

    The coke may or may not be 100% pure, but its not laced with rat poison, the weed may not be the highest THC on the market, but a few drags off a blunt may be what I need or want.

    If I want something to get rid of the cough I have had for a couple weeks that woke me up at night, I should be able to go to the DR and get some codeine cough syrup without being interviewed more than I was for a job, and then refused and given something that doesn't really work but is toxic to my liver. Antibiotics, antivirals, and other meds should still be available for people to get at the Doctor, they should be by prescription, if some idiot wants to try and make his own antibiotics let him try and die, and if someone wants to try and save no money as free healthcare is available to all when they are broke and can't pay anyway feel free.


    The issues here are the availability of drugs like morphine, and other opiates that if I were dying I would prefer to go out with. I could drink myself to death in all reality, I could put a gun in my mouth and feel no pain, I could take the CO2 route, OTC DMX and drown myself, hundreds of ways really.


    The issue is the government saying its "illegal" to end your own life. Its not their place, and there is no law in the constitution or bill of rights that I am aware of that prevents anyone from ending their own life. While I am sure some do good religious asshat made the motion to pass the law against suicide, as if that really helps or prevents anything.

    Speed limits prevent all speeders.
    Gun laws prevent gun crimes.
    Theft laws prevent all theft.
    Violence laws prevent violence.

    drug laws are a failure. Suicide laws are a failure. Governments job is to regulate people by laws the majority approve of, or at least that is how its supposed to work, but we now have corrupt law makers, corrupt police, corrupt judges, and its broken, otherwise marijuana and other "drugs" would be what they are, a personal choice.
     
  17. FordGT90Concept

    FordGT90Concept Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2009
    Messages:
    28,171 (9.90/day)
    Likes Received:
    774
    Location:
    IA, USA
    How do you know it isn't? FDA requires a chain of paperwork going from the raw ingredient producer all of the way to the pharmacy. If rat poison some how got into the product, there would be a recall. When's the last time a drug dealer recalled his coke because it was potentially harmful?


    Federal speed limits were originally imposed due to the fuel crisis in the 1970s.
    Gun laws were originally imposed to quell the number of fully automatic guns in mobster hands during the 1920s.
    Theft laws are about as old as man--they're not to prevent theft, they are to punish the perpetrator so he/she reconsiders doing it again.
    Violence laws are about as old as man as well--they tend to be designed to remove violent people from society or humiliate them badly so they think twice.


    FDA laws are not a failure; DEA laws are a failure. It is very important to distinguish the two facets of "drugs laws." They are fundamentally very different.
     
    Last edited: Oct 13, 2014
  18. FordGT90Concept

    FordGT90Concept Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2009
    Messages:
    28,171 (9.90/day)
    Likes Received:
    774
    Location:
    IA, USA
    An opposing view of Marilyn Golden (policy analyst) whom believes assisted suicide should be illegal: The danger of assisted suicide laws


    She gives the cost of the drug that is prescribed:
     
  19. Steevo

    Steevo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2009
    Messages:
    3,982 (1.39/day)
    Likes Received:
    53
    If I had a terminal illness and the cost of fighting it would bankrupt my family or I could live until it wasn't worth it in MY opinion and it cost $300.


    Clear choice for me, but then again I am not a selfish scared conceited asshole afraid of death.

    The FDA isn't doing its job anyway, when we get ecoli laced foods. http://www.cdc.gov/ecoli/outbreaks.html Food and Drug Administration, allows for "new" meds that are more dangerous than the diseases they treat, don't guarantee purity. The USP however does create and govern standards. The FDA has actually been in trouble for not releasing life saving medicine when under pressure from big pharm so they can sell crap and make their millions.

    http://www.propublica.org/article/fda-let-drugs-approved-on-fraudulent-research-stay-on-the-market
    http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/05/14/mercks-adhd-drugs-unsafe.aspx


    Dozens more, and hundreds more if you look at things like the FDA AIDS shit scheme that really happened in the 80's.
     
    Last edited: Oct 14, 2014

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page