3 ms·

If someone wants to die, let them fucking die. The fact that people consider this "contentious" is utterly ridiculous. How can you possibly justify telling o

If someone wants to die, let them fucking die. The fact that people consider this "contentious" is utterly ridiculous. How can you possibly justify telling other people to go on living if they don't desire to do so? Seriously, mind your own fucking business.

elygre 7y ago
This is why I consider it “contentious”: «On February 13, 2014, Belgium legalized euthanasia by lethal injection for children,» from [1]. «Even the controversial head of Belgium’s euthanasia commission is concerned that a well-known Belgian psychiatrist is allowing too many of her psychiatric patients to be euthananised,» from [2]. 1: http://www.patientsrightscouncil.org/site/belgium/ http://www.patientsrightscouncil.org/site/belgium/ 2: https://www.bioedge.org/mobile/view/belgium-euthanasia-doctors-split-over-psychiatric-illness/12490 https://www.bioedge.org/mobile/view/belgium-euthanasia-docto...
- CalRobert 7y ago
  'The law states a child would have to be terminally ill, face "unbearable physical suffering" and make repeated requests to die - before euthanasia is considered. ' https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26181615 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26181615 Perhaps the law is not being applied this way, but I think the idea here is "this poor child is in agony with no hope of improvement and keeping them alive is torture in a sense" - not "let's take terminally ill children lightly"
Ntrails 7y ago
> If someone wants to die, let them fucking die. That is not what the assisted suicide debate is about. The debate is about the right to kill someone who cannot do so themselves.
- kube-system 7y ago
  Not to mention, it’s not exactly clear as to who is able to make that decision.
- lotsofpulp 7y ago
  I’ve never thought of that as the debate. Not providing care is not killing someone. We already do plenty of that in the US. The debate is about giving someone a quick, painless death via the application of certain medications as opposed to letting someone waste away painfully.

elygre 7y ago

This is why I consider it “contentious”: «On February 13, 2014, Belgium legalized euthanasia by lethal injection for children,» from [1]. «Even the controversial head of Belgium’s euthanasia commission is concerned that a well-known Belgian psychiatrist is allowing too many of her psychiatric patients to be euthananised,» from [2]. 1: http://www.patientsrightscouncil.org/site/belgium/ http://www.patientsrightscouncil.org/site/belgium/ 2: https://www.bioedge.org/mobile/view/belgium-euthanasia-doctors-split-over-psychiatric-illness/12490 https://www.bioedge.org/mobile/view/belgium-euthanasia-docto...

CalRobert 7y ago
'The law states a child would have to be terminally ill, face "unbearable physical suffering" and make repeated requests to die - before euthanasia is considered. ' https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26181615 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26181615 Perhaps the law is not being applied this way, but I think the idea here is "this poor child is in agony with no hope of improvement and keeping them alive is torture in a sense" - not "let's take terminally ill children lightly"

Ntrails 7y ago

> If someone wants to die, let them fucking die. That is not what the assisted suicide debate is about. The debate is about the right to kill someone who cannot do so themselves.

kube-system 7y ago
Not to mention, it’s not exactly clear as to who is able to make that decision.
lotsofpulp 7y ago
I’ve never thought of that as the debate. Not providing care is not killing someone. We already do plenty of that in the US. The debate is about giving someone a quick, painless death via the application of certain medications as opposed to letting someone waste away painfully.