Dutch doctors euthanise 29-year-old woman with depression

[Rhubarb]

Rhubarb.

WHY do you think its OK to impose your morality upon them?

Erm. If THEY want to die, in not imposing anything on them. I would support their choice against others’ religious sensibilities.

 

[ConstantLearner]

WHY do you think its OK to impose your morality upon them?

I don’t think he’s imposing his morality on others even though I do not agree with it. I would say you’re imposing yours on him by publicly posting a prayer that he come round to your way of thinking. I don’t want anyone to commit suicide, ever, but I would not impose my morality on them. We are all on a path, and we are all imperfect. People have to find the right path for themselves.

 

[Cathoholic]

Rhubarb (bold mine):

And if they are in pain and want to end it (for 8 years it seems) then I hope that a doctor can be found to assist them, and I hope they find peace.

Cathoholic (with parenthetical addition for context):

WHY do you think its OK to impose your morality upon them (people who want to committ suicide)?

If THEY want to die, in not imposing anything on them.

.

You just said, “IF they are in pain”.

.

That’s an imposition.

Why do you think YOU can impose a condition upon THEM?

(Why support killing them at all?)

 

[Cathoholic]

ConstantLearner:

I would say you’re imposing yours on him by publicly posting a prayer . . .

So what?

I don’t have an issue with imposition of morality upon a society.

I never said I oppose imposing morality on society.

(I am FOR imposing moral standards on society.

Especially I am opposed to killing people, most especially euphamistically called “euthanasia”).

My question concerned principles of what Rhubarb was saying, not me.

 

[Cathoholic]

ConstantLearner (emphasis mine):

I would not impose my morality on them. . . . People have to find the right path for themselves.

.

ConstantLearner. Should "finding the right path for themselves" be imposed upon society?

 

[Rhubarb]

YOU can impose a condition upon THEM?

Again, I’m not imposing anything on them. They are the ones making the decision, deciding they’re in pain, and wanting to do something about it. I don’t understand where you’re coming from with respect to me doing anything.

 

[ConstantLearner]

Again, I’m not imposing anything on them. They are the ones making the decision, deciding they’re in pain, and wanting to do something about it. I don’t understand where you’re coming from with respect to me doing anything.

I don’t understand it, either. You are giving them the right to exercise their free will.

 

[ConstantLearner]

ConstantLearner. Should “finding the right path for themselves” be imposed upon society?

You are contradicting yourself in that question, so answering it is impossible.

 

[Cathoholic]

Edit: This is to ConstantLearner. Not Rhubarb.

.

ConstantLearner:

You are contradicting yourself in that question, so answering it is impossible.

No ConstantLearner.

YOU are contradicting YOURSELF. Your post had a built-in self contradiction.

Which was so obvious, that you refused to defend your own position about people “finding the right path for themselves”.

If you deny “finding the right path for themselves” should be imposed on society, then you are denying your whole point.

If you affirm “finding the right path for themselves” should be imposed on society, then you are . . . imposing “finding the right path for themselves” upon all of society.

 

[Rhubarb]

Did you mean to reply to someone else?

But I guess you’re right? I’m imposing “autonomous adult people have a prima facie right to exercise their own free will over their own bodies and lives”? Is that what you’re accusing me of?

 

[ConstantLearner]

YOU are contradicting YOURSELF. Your post had a built-in self contradiction.

It’s your right to think so, but I’m definitely not, and discussing me is off-topic. I’m not going there.

 

[ConstantLearner]

But I guess you’re right? I’m imposing “autonomous adult people have a prima facie right to exercise their own free will over their own bodies and lives”? Is that what you’re accusing me of?

And I’m suggesting much the same thing, Rhubarb: That we let grown adults decide what’s best for them in life and not try to impose Catholic morality on all.

 

[Cathoholic]

ConstantLearner (with parenthetical addition mine for context bold mine also) :

I would not impose my morality on them (people who want to commit premeditated murder against themselves–suicide) . . . . People have to find the right path for themselves.

.

Cathoholic to ConstantLearner:

.

Should “finding the right path for themselves” be imposed upon society?

.

Cathoholic (bold mine added):

YOU are contradicting YOURSELF. Your post had a built-in self contradiction.

.

ConstantLearner:

It’s your right to think so, but I’m definitely not, and discussing me is off-topic. I’m not going there.

.
Nobody ix attempting to “discuss me” (discuss you) ConstantLearner.

The whole crux of my statement was “Your POST has a built-in self-contradiction.”

I’m OK if you don’t want to discuss it further.

I’ll quit responding to your posts on this thread unless there is a good reason to do otherwise.

I’m good with that.

God bless you ConstantLearner.

 

[exnihilo]

I don’t want anyone to commit suicide, ever, but I would not impose my morality on them.

‘I don’t want anyone to murder anyone, but I would never impose my morality on them’. That is literally what you are saying. The murder is self murder. Actually, in this case, it isn’t even that. It is murder of another person.

 

[Cathoholic]

Rhubarb:

But I guess you’re right? I’m imposing “autonomous adult people have a prima facie right to exercise their own free will over their own bodies and lives”?

.

Then drop the false pretense of the person wanting to commit murder being “in pain” and just say what you mean.

Just say you assert it is OK for these people to commit murder (against themselves) for ANY REASON they want.

And WHY limit yourself to “adult people”?

There you go imposing your morality again Rhubarb. (This time you are discriminating against children)

 

[Rhubarb]

Yeah I can get behind that, all things being equal. That’s what autonomy is all about.

Because children are not autonomous agents. You do know that slippery slopes are fallacious right?

 

[Cathoholic]

OK Rhubarb.

You are OK with adults committing murder for ANY REASON (as long as its just against themselves).

Thanks for admitting that.

But you want to “limit” these murderings . . . to adults ONLY because these adults are “autonomous agents”.

Who cares?

What gives YOU the right to impose some “autonomous agent” prerequisite principle that you invented upon people?

So what if they are not “autonomous agents”.

Why not “let the murdering begin” against children in Rhubarbworld? (I agree the murdering should NOT begin, but I might not agree with your “WHY”)

 

[Cathoholic]

Rhubarb:

You do know that slippery slopes are fallacious right?

There is no “slippery slope” being used here (by me anyway).

A “slippery slope” would be me saying “If you let adults murder themselves, kids would be murdering themslves too because of that.”

THAT would be a slippery slope fallacy.

I’m not purposing that.

I am trying to find out YOUR PRINCIPLES.

No “slippery slope” here Rhubarb. At least by me.

 

[Rhubarb]

You’re being ridiculous.

Our medical ethics is entirely centered around the idea of the patients as autonomous entities who get the final say when it comes to their care. So… Pretty much every bioethicist, legal scholar, and etc. understand the importance of autonomy and self-choice when it comes to their own bodies. You may have a deeply seated religious belief that we do not own our own bodies and lives. I respect that to a degree. But it’s not the basis of our law arguments or the basis of our bio-ethics. Murder is an unlawful killing. By definition, suicide where legal cannot be murder.

Let’s see if this works - poke holes in the following, and if you bring up something (that doesn’t appeal to your religion) I’m open to modifying.

I have no prima facie issue with suicide if and only if the individual in question is an autonomous, competent agent

I also have no issue with not-suicide. In case you’re worried about me forcing suicide on people (?)

 

[Cathoholic]

Rhubarb:

You’re being ridiculous.

You need to present the PRINCIPLES Rhubarb. Even if you think I am being “ridiculous”.

I want a principled answer.

Our medical ethics is entirely centered around the idea of the patients as autonomous entities who get the final say when it comes to their care.

This is just false.

Many moms show up in physicians offices insisting on antibiotics that get told by a physician “no”.

Many people are coerced into getting immunizations EVEN by their EMPLOYER (these are not even physicians) at the risk of termination.

Your premise is false.

Rhubarb:

Let’s see if this works - poke holes in the following, and if you bring up something (that doesn’t appeal to your religion) I’m open to modifying.

This is the fallacy of equivocation Rhubarb.