'Suicide' Billboard Along NJ Highway Sparks Uproar

Originally posted by Gorman91

At the risk of a strawman fallacy, we here in America have gone silent on the wrongs of our government, and so the government over generation just grows and grows.

It's slow decay versus shocking fast decay. It does happen.

Its actually a "slippery slope" fallacy. That allowing assisted suicide in extreme cases will lead to it in less extreme cases, and then the next thing you know we will be killing everyone who stubs their toe.

But it is a fallacy.

en.wikipedia.org...

The argument takes on one of various semantical forms:

* In the classical form, the arguer suggests that making a move in a particular direction starts something on a path down a "slippery slope". Having started down the metaphorical slope, it will continue to slide in the same direction (the arguer usually sees the direction as a negative direction, hence the "sliding downwards" metaphor).
* Modern usage includes a logically valid form, in which a minor action causes a significant impact through a long chain of logical relationships. Note that establishing this chain of logical implication (or quantifying the relevant probabilities) makes this form logically valid. The slippery slope argument remains a fallacy if such a chain is not established.

Much like allowing abortions has not led to the killing of newborns, then two year olds, and then any child a parent no longer wants, allowing assisted suicide in cases where there is no hope of ending the persons suffering does not necessarily mean we will end up killing everyone for silly reasons.

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander


But it kind of has. Maybe not at the rate predicted, but it has. Not we debate about if we should keep babies alive if they survive an abortion and if parents should have the right to kill their children if they are born with diseases. The slippery slop has been proven. On a grand multitude of fields.

As to the choice itself and where the right exists, I really can't say I have an answer. One must ask the question though. Many items forced started as a choice. Some of the obviously wrong ones like drinking were overturned. But once still has to ask. The slippery slope DOES occur on most things over the course of generations. So one has to be careful.

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander

But it is a fallacy.

en.wikipedia.org...

The argument takes on one of various semantical forms:

* In the classical form, the arguer suggests that making a move in a particular direction starts something on a path down a "slippery slope". Having started down the metaphorical slope, it will continue to slide in the same direction (the arguer usually sees the direction as a negative direction, hence the "sliding downwards" metaphor).

THAT is a fallacy! We live in a dualistic universe... it is THE law supreme! LOL Everything has its opposite or isn't here, in this universe.

reply to post by Aresh Troxit


While I agree that we live in a dualistic universe, (or at least that we perceive it that way, I personally think it really isnt, we just see it that way) I am not sure how you are saying a slippery slope argument is about dualism.

It really isnt about opposites, its like saying (deliberately avoiding the abortion example so we dont derail the thread, sorry I brought it up in the first place, too touchy and debatable) that allowing a death penalty for murder will lead to a death penalty for robbery, and before we know it, we will be executing jaywalkers.

We have had a death penalty for murder (and a couple other things) for a very long time, and we do not execute jaywalkers.

The slippery slope fallacy does not mean that some things COULD not go on such a slide. It means that arguing that they MUST go on a slide is just not true, unless you can legitimately show that it is a necessity that they will.

We have no good reason to believe at this point that allowing assisted suicide will end up with people being killed for almost anything. It COULD happen, but it is unlikely to happen, because our fears of it happening would suggest that we would legislate tightly to prevent that from being the case.

Gorman points out that the next generations might do something different, which they might, but we cannot refuse to do things soley based on what future generations may or may not do. They COULD become even more permissive, or, they COULD have a backlash and outlaw the whole thing again, and deem it barbaric and cruel. (As some states have the death penalty)

reply to post by Raist
[more

cannot say I agree with suicide, I think it personally to be the most selfish act a person can do.

Dont you think itsa bit selfish to keep someone suffering incurable illness alive because you dont want him to die and his death makin you sad ?

reply to post by OTTOKARMA


If you had completely read any of my posts you would know I did not call for forcing anyone to live that did not wish to.

I am simply giving my opinion that I think it is selfish more so for people that are not in critical condition and feeling pain. But again if you had bothered reading my posts and not stopping at one line you might know this.

My opinion is mostly for those who kill themselves because life is too hard because they cannot deal with everyday life that others do. My opinion is based on a very real event that occurred in my life. My opinion is based on a family member that was not in pain, was not dying, was not even ill for that matter. My opinion is based on the fact that someone decided that drinking was more important than their family. It is based on the fact that they could not live without the drink which put them in a depression. A depression formed on the delusion that they were in their own sorry world with no one that cared.

Now try to pick this post apart, or better yet go back and read my other posts. I never said I wished to keep anyone from killing themselves. I simply said I find it selfish (in most cases) and I do not agree with it but they are free to do so if they choose.

Raist

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander


True, but this is something that has happened before. Eugenics movements against suffering. They did not end well. Even my favorite president Teddy Roosevelt I have to disdain for his own Eugenics beliefs.

When my 13 year old akita started lying around the house crying all day, we took her to the vet. When we discovered her condition was terminal and the choice was allow her to suffer or choose having her put to sleep, we chose the latter. When my cat went into liver failure due to the Chinese pet food problem, we had him put to sleep. When my mom was diagnosed with terminal cancer, she had no choice. She was in pain and the meds could only do so much. Her last weeks were spent in semi-counsciousness while nurses came in and slathered her with adivan.

Understand that my pets were not just animals; they were family members. The decision to end their suffering was made not because the were just animals but because they were our beloved family.

My dad had a DNR but never mentioned his own suffering although we could see it. He passed 13 days after my mom. If we can live in dignity, we should be able to die in dignity. There is nothing dignifying about deteriorating before you families eyes.

reply to post by darkelf


But that is where it started from before. Look, I understand suffering sucks and all but once a society accepts suicide as ok it's not really worked out. a generation into the eugenics movement in America a century ago lead to very bad things. Suicide became acceptable in Japanese culture and in war you saw what it happened. Nations like Iran that value life have rarely any problems with suicide bombers and degenerate views on life. Yea I know Iran is not a perfect example, but its people are quite modern compared to their government. Once a society believes that its ok to chose death, the next generation does have a tendency to try and spread it and in some cases force it. Comfort those suffering. Don't give up and end it.

Why do so many people, based on their OWN sense of values and morals feel a compulsion to judge and rule over others, quite often not having all the facts? It's a personal decision and responsibility with personal consequences to be discussed with loved ones that effects no one else. And it's really none of anyone else's business. There should be NO laws governing this.

reply to post by ~Lucidity


Well you have me there for my own minimalist government policy. But I still would question the matter from past experiences the nation and other nations have had with it.

I don't care if it's leagal or not. I have schizophrenia. I watched 3 of my grandparents die slow agonizing deaths from cancer. They were all on opoiot based pain killers at they're end.

I can't take them they make me sick and reak havok will my illness. I've made the decision when my time is up I'll handle it my way.

I suffer eveyday form this illness and my life has been hell. But have no intention of ending it until I'm diagnosed with something terminal.

reply to post by wantsome


But if you have that disease how do you know your feelings or your own or the results of that? It's a biased paradox. I feel this way because I feel this way because I fell this way...

I had major twitches and suffered a lot as a kid because of it. I simply said no. Sometimes under stress they come back, but it is silenced. Never heard any voices in my head by it was basically the same thing when I got the urge to touch things and repeat sentences. I used the pain that it generated to curve myself away. Don't really have a problem anymore.

Pain is no reason to give up nor make it ok to give up. If you must no one is stopping you, but that does not make it ok nor right,.

Now try to pick this post apart, or better yet go back and read my other posts.

Seriously i aint gonna try, im not here for "picking" useless posts.
I just really hate that kind of opinion about suicide, its annoying to see peoples judging suicide.

"Oh no dont kill yourself, because if you do so, i gonna suffer from it"
its just ridiculous.
of course im pretty sure the day you get a terrible ,painful,incurable disease, you gonna man up and smile at life, sure Bozo .

Originally posted by OTTOKARMA

Now try to pick this post apart, or better yet go back and read my other posts.

Seriously i aint gonna try, im not here for "picking" useless posts.
I just really hate that kind of opinion about suicide, its annoying to see peoples judging suicide.

"Oh no dont kill yourself, because if you do so, i gonna suffer from it"
its just ridiculous.
of course im pretty sure the day you get a terrible ,painful,incurable disease, you gonna man up and smile at life, sure Bozo .

Again, I never said that those in pain or suffering were part of my opinion. While I do not agree with suicide my opinion is about those who end their life without a health issue being present. Those who go on about how terrible the world is for them.

If you would read the post you would see that.

Also, please refrain from name calling it is a childish way to go about a discussion. My grandmother had a will written that stated she did not want artificial support if something happened. I watched her died without support. I have no problem with that. I do have a problem with those like my grandfather who decided his own personal delusional world was more important than his family.

Raist

If someone want commit suicide , for any reasons , nones have the right to judge , incurable disease or not.

Once you decide, the choice is in your hand , no matter what they say.
So the whole " suicide is bad boo ****** hoo" is just hypocrite.

Yes suicide is selfish, that why i respect it, because at least it the last thing peoples around us CANT control !!

[edit on 16-7-2010 by OTTOKARMA]

reply to post by OTTOKARMA


I definably have the right to judge. I just don't have the power to stop them. Someone who desires death will get it.

For instance, I can judge them as being weaker than most. But that would be unethical and wrong on so many levels.

That is why my main concern is the normalization and acceptance of this kind of behavior as historically it does not bode well.

One of the biggest slogans for women for abortion was and still is "My Body, My Choice!" I can't wait for the death with dignity people to start chanting "My Life, My Death, My Choice!" We are all going to die some day, and none of us know how or when. There are only four types of death: accidental, natural (due to disease or aging), homicidal and suicidal. How do you want to go?

edit for spelling

[edit on 7/16/2010 by darkelf]

reply to post by darkelf


Well there's one problem with that. For abortion, it was not their body. And besides rape, it was their choice to have sex. So it was a major fallacy which these days many laugh at.

Sure it would work for suicidal people. Because it actually is their body and their choice. But just as abortion has spread into mother's right to kill born children with problems and just as lackluster respect for life has lead to the rise of suicide bombers in Japan and the middle east in the past, the question has to be posed how do you prevent what has happened in so many nations before, including the US, from happening again?

Respect for life?? Please explain how allowing someone to suffer for months while their bodies deteriorate shows respect. I understand that doctors are supposed to 'first do no harm.' But if a patient is terminal and makes their decision while they are still sound of mind, letting them die a slow painful death is not only harmful but inhumane.