3 ms·

I'm so confused by your comparison. Children cannot consent, which is where this argument ends. Whether they are harmed by a sexual act or not is not really rel

I'm so confused by your comparison. Children cannot consent, which is where this argument ends. Whether they are harmed by a sexual act or not is not really relevant in the slightest - they cannot consent to it which makes it statutory rape. In case of voluntary ending your own life - we are talking about consenting adults(or at least I hope we are!). >>Are you unswayed by testimonials of suicide survivors who say they immediately regretted the decision? Look, we can both play the emotional game - are you unswayed by the testimonials of people living in lifelong debiliating pain and suffering who are not given any legal way to end their own suffering? Someone who is paralyzed in every way other than blinking their eyes is telling you that pure existence is suffering and they want their life to end - you're going to stand in front of them and say "no, you're not allowed to"? You'd be stronger than most of us I guess. >>Can you imagine an opioid epidemic level of commission based kickbacks but for suicide booths? No, I actually can't. >>Sad? Pay us to kill you! If you can't imagine any other reason why people want to kill themselves other than being sad then I don't know what to tell you.

ikgdeeg 2y ago
I chose to reply to this comment because OP said: > These conversations usually turn into philosophical or religious arguments around life. I feel this is an absurd argument, as I listed, there are plenty of reasons to push back on this outside the purview of philosophy or religion. For instance, my mention of the predatory history of some medical interventions. And > My opinion is that suicide is completely valid and should not be stigmatized or illegal. OP said “completely valid” and I would argue in reality everyone has a “line”, and I was using extreme examples to illuminate that we all have this line and it is more productive to discuss where it lies than to assume we hold the only rationale position. It worked because you started to draw your line. Namely, your > are you unswayed by the testimonials of people living in lifelong debiliating pain and suffering who are not given any legal way to end their own suffering? Someone who is paralyzed in every way other than blinking their eyes is telling you that pure existence is suffering and they want their life to end - you're going to stand in front of them and say "no, you're not allowed to"? And again, > you can't imagine any other reason why people want to kill themselves other than being sad then I don't know what to tell you. So you disagree with the OPs “completely valid” and feel it should be valid under carefully considered circumstances? So where do you draw the line there? Only for sufferers of chronic pain? What would you tell to a sad but otherwise healthy person who elects to get the procedure? Also, do you have resources for these testimonials? Or statistics on if they are more or less common than those that I mentioned? > No, I actually can't. Then you are willfully ignorant. There are so many examples of predatory medicine and advertising. Why would this intervention be free from the barbs of human nature? What about suicide booths exempts them from enshittification?

ikgdeeg 2y ago

I chose to reply to this comment because OP said: > These conversations usually turn into philosophical or religious arguments around life. I feel this is an absurd argument, as I listed, there are plenty of reasons to push back on this outside the purview of philosophy or religion. For instance, my mention of the predatory history of some medical interventions. And > My opinion is that suicide is completely valid and should not be stigmatized or illegal. OP said “completely valid” and I would argue in reality everyone has a “line”, and I was using extreme examples to illuminate that we all have this line and it is more productive to discuss where it lies than to assume we hold the only rationale position. It worked because you started to draw your line. Namely, your > are you unswayed by the testimonials of people living in lifelong debiliating pain and suffering who are not given any legal way to end their own suffering? Someone who is paralyzed in every way other than blinking their eyes is telling you that pure existence is suffering and they want their life to end - you're going to stand in front of them and say "no, you're not allowed to"? And again, > you can't imagine any other reason why people want to kill themselves other than being sad then I don't know what to tell you. So you disagree with the OPs “completely valid” and feel it should be valid under carefully considered circumstances? So where do you draw the line there? Only for sufferers of chronic pain? What would you tell to a sad but otherwise healthy person who elects to get the procedure? Also, do you have resources for these testimonials? Or statistics on if they are more or less common than those that I mentioned? > No, I actually can't. Then you are willfully ignorant. There are so many examples of predatory medicine and advertising. Why would this intervention be free from the barbs of human nature? What about suicide booths exempts them from enshittification?