Author Topic: You don't have the right...  (Read 6134 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Lysix

  • Guest
Re: You don't have the right...
« Reply #15 on: February 16, 2007, 02:56:10 am »
You appear to have read his post wrong; that wasn't his intent at all. He was replying to Rad's post, in which Rad implied that something is a right simply because someone can do it. Confusing, of course, ability to do something with the right to do something. ^Spike was merely pointing out the mistake with a little rhetorical humor fun :D

Oops. My bad. [:

Offline Irrationalist

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2240
  • Karma: 2
  • Gender: Male
Re: You don't have the right...
« Reply #16 on: February 16, 2007, 08:59:51 am »
But my girlfriend broke up with me, and at 14 I truly know how bad life can be, and that my life is the epitome of a bad life thingy!

That made me laugh, I see your point.

I think one has a choice of what to do with his/her life. In the end you are the only one who can decide if you care about how it impacts others, and what "ultimate goals" you have to fulfill. Hopefully one wouldn't just off himself cuz of a break up, but if it happened oh well.

Offline Sirix

  • Self proclaimed forum Villain
  • Community Supporter
  • Machinae Prime
  • ******
  • Posts: 3230
  • Karma: 83
  • Gender: Male
Re: You don't have the right...
« Reply #17 on: February 16, 2007, 07:53:07 pm »
But my girlfriend broke up with me, and at 14 I truly know how bad life can be, and that my life is the epitome of a bad life thingy!
oh well.

well said.

Offline Trezker

  • Machinae Prime
  • *****
  • Posts: 2794
  • Karma: 60
  • Gender: Male
  • I don't eat food!
    • Trezker is a programmer
Re: You don't have the right...
« Reply #18 on: February 16, 2007, 08:47:02 pm »
There's too much people in the world so I don't think it's wrong to contribute to its well being through suicide, almost like darwin awards.

I think life is quite pointless but since I don't know anything about what happens when you die I'm just gonna try to make the most of my life.

You have the power of TIME ON YOUR HANDS. -Laser
"Oh come on Trez, everyone knows you're sexy" -Spider Chii

Offline Jack Lupino

  • Worst Dude
  • Moderator
  • Machinae Prime
  • ***
  • Posts: 12941
  • Karma: 62
  • Gender: Female
Re: You don't have the right...
« Reply #19 on: February 16, 2007, 09:35:44 pm »
Oh, man, now I HAVE to answer!

Possibly, but it's the same principle. I mean, just because you can do something doesn't mean you have a right to do it.
True to some extend, i think you have the right to control your own life.

Don't you ?

Offline Xhu

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 793
  • Karma: 34
  • Gentlemen... it's a nuclear device.
Re: You don't have the right...
« Reply #20 on: February 16, 2007, 10:31:29 pm »
Yep. SpeedD made my point much better than I ever could, though;

He was replying to Rad's post, in which Rad implied that something is a right simply because someone can do it. Confusing, of course, ability to do something with the right to do something. ^Spike was merely pointing out the mistake with a little rhetorical humor fun :D
(i) There will come a day when nothing you did matters. But it is not today. Here and now, you are alive.
(ii) Live well under your own authority.
(iii) Abolishing suffering is impossible. Lessening suffering is mandatory.

Offline Gravehill

  • Global Moderator
  • Machinae Prime
  • *****
  • Posts: 5835
  • Karma: 248
  • Gender: Male
  • Dignity! Strength! Love!
Re: You don't have the right...
« Reply #21 on: February 17, 2007, 04:04:02 am »
There are numerous occasions when person does not have right to do suicide.

If one is minor one does not have juridical rights to choose about one's own life : therefore one does not have juridical right to die by one's own hand.

If one's judgement is impaired so much one cannot be seen as juridically autonomous one does not have right to die by one's own hand.

If person is bound by agreement or pack where that person has given away his right to commit suicide.

First case regarding minors is quite clear. Kids don't understand meaning of death realistically. That ability comes only with age and experience of life. Suicide is not kids play. It's not game or play at all. There is no "saving points", no replays, no new versions. When the plug is out it's game over, forever. Kids don't know what kind of possibilities life offers, they don't know what they will lose by doing suicide. To further enlighten this principle and how it can be seen in Finnish culture : even when it's legal for 18 years old to get driver license and drive car it's interesting to notice that most accidents, especially those involving death are driven by young, about 20 years old males. It's not that they don't know it's dangerous. They know it. They just don't understand it (no, it's not that "they don't care" - they don't care because they don't understand).

Second case of impaired judgement is little more complex. Such reasons are for example, psychological disorders, very low intelligence or general lack of competence of taking care of oneself. Usual reason for suicide is combination of psychological disease and usage of drug(s), in Finland alcohol. When people take drugs their judgement is impaired. Sometimes they do things that they would normally do and regret them afterwards. Suicide is something one cannot regret afterwards if it succeeds. Therefore someone who is trying to harm oneself while under influence of drugs should be prevented. It's very probable that one does not really understand consequences in such stage. If it's case of psychological disease person's psychological status ought to be examined whether one's judgement is impaired by disease or not. If it's impaired every possible action ought to be taken for protection of that individual. Psychological diseases can be treated. There is other possibilities than suicide in such cases. If it's evident after examination that one's judgement is not impaired that much by such disease one is free to do what ever one wants, thou.

That's juridical side of person's right to kill oneself in case of Finnish law.

Word "right" is multidimensional, thou. There are multiple sides in our rights. What someone thinks as his right might be wrong in other's eyes. There's subjective rights and social rights. There are rights that are tightly tied to certain systems or social groups and so on. List is endless. And because there is so many different, subjective systems we have to choose our common system which is called our juridical system, law. We might want to take mutually agreed declarations like declaration of human rights in consideration as well. Is it right for someone to kill oneself? It's up to each country's law. It could lead in ironical situations thou. Just think about person who is accused of suicide attempt and gets death penalty... Or one that's awaiting death penalty and whose suicide attempts are prevented so that they could execute him.

Other than juridical rights there is of course other mutual agreements or packs where person might have joined. Such agreements might give and/or take some rights. There are religious rights if one belongs to religious groups, there are rights inside relationship if one is living in such and so on. In those cases other parties in that agreement have right to plead to mutual agreement and say that "because this agreement you don't have right to do so". Not every right has to be written or spoken - such rights can be derived from promises or well grounded expectations.

Whatever the case about one's right to commit suicide might be one thing is certain. If someone wants to kill oneself really badly there is no way to prevent it infinitely. It can be delayed thou and this might give some change that something happens that makes that person to change one's mind. If it's something that might change, that is. If there's uncurable physical sickness with much pain involved or something similar I can't really see more humane thing to do than let that person end his own life if he wants so.

That's how I see people's right to do suicide.
Random ramblings and furious feminine novels per versatility.

Offline Xhu

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 793
  • Karma: 34
  • Gentlemen... it's a nuclear device.
Re: You don't have the right...
« Reply #22 on: February 17, 2007, 04:36:25 am »
If the state were to have thtat much control, it literally would be a case of completely owning the entire population's lives...I mean, I'm pretty sure suicide is illegal in places.

No idea where I'm going with this.

Just a thought.
(i) There will come a day when nothing you did matters. But it is not today. Here and now, you are alive.
(ii) Live well under your own authority.
(iii) Abolishing suffering is impossible. Lessening suffering is mandatory.

Offline harvey danger

  • Machinae Prime
  • *****
  • Posts: 4289
  • Karma: 49
  • Gender: Male
  • Werd
Re: You don't have the right...
« Reply #23 on: February 17, 2007, 04:59:48 am »
If the state were to have thtat much control, it literally would be a case of completely owning the entire population's lives...I mean, I'm pretty sure suicide is illegal in places.

No idea where I'm going with this.

Just a thought.

It is illegal in a few places in the U.S. Obviously, if the person succeeds, nothing can happen. But if they fail, they get thrown into a court-appointed mental health facility.
That's the problem with heroes, really. Their only purpose in life is to thwart others. They make no plans, develop no strategies. They react instead of act. Without villains, heroes would stagnate. Without heroes, villains would be running the world. Heroes have morals. Villains have work ethic.

Offline PrescriptiveBarony

  • Machinae Prime
  • *****
  • Posts: 2680
  • Karma: 115
  • Gender: Male
  • Let there be blacklight.
Re: You don't have the right...
« Reply #24 on: February 17, 2007, 07:11:48 am »
etc.

laws should have nothing to do with it...

and if someone's right to their life can be limited by other people making a judgment of their mental condition, then how can we call it a right at all? mental stability is by no means a black and white thing; plenty of people who today are called eccentric, creative, or simply homosexual would have been considered deranged or otherwise mentally unwell in times past, and it would be silly to think that now we can make better decisions about who is and isn't allowed to control their life.

The whole idea of having rights is weird in the first place. if a person has children who depend on him, it would be selfish and devastating if he were to kill himself. but since when have there been prohibitions against such things? What if he simply left his family and moved to south america? The result would be the same, and he would still be considered selfish, but few would claim that someone has an absolute obligation to hang around people who depend on him.

and by the by, "juridical" isn't a word. perhaps you mean "judicial." or something having to do with "jurisdiction..."


Quote from: Drakonis
Everybody should just <3.

Offline harvey danger

  • Machinae Prime
  • *****
  • Posts: 4289
  • Karma: 49
  • Gender: Male
  • Werd
Re: You don't have the right...
« Reply #25 on: February 17, 2007, 11:47:56 pm »
and if someone's right to their life can be limited by other people making a judgment of their mental condition, then how can we call it a right at all? mental stability is by no means a black and white thing; plenty of people who today are called eccentric, creative, or simply homosexual would have been considered deranged or otherwise mentally unwell in times past, and it would be silly to think that now we can make better decisions about who is and isn't allowed to control their life.

We know better now, though. We certainly don't know everything... but we know better. We have the ability now to say "that guy has severe mental retardation, he needs someone to take care of him," because medical sciences have improved, and we can tell that someone's brain is inhibited in parts that are vital for a good quality of life. Like you said, it's not black and white... in most cases. But there are certainly times when we can determine that someone is unfit to take care of themselves, at least alone. As such, there are times when we can determine that someone needs treatment for something like bipolar or unipolar depression.

Granted, doctors thought things like lobotomies and electroshock therapy were GOOD ideas. But, as I said... we know better.
That's the problem with heroes, really. Their only purpose in life is to thwart others. They make no plans, develop no strategies. They react instead of act. Without villains, heroes would stagnate. Without heroes, villains would be running the world. Heroes have morals. Villains have work ethic.

Offline PrescriptiveBarony

  • Machinae Prime
  • *****
  • Posts: 2680
  • Karma: 115
  • Gender: Male
  • Let there be blacklight.
Re: You don't have the right...
« Reply #26 on: February 18, 2007, 11:26:26 am »
we know better.

have we learned nothing???

what you meant to say is "we believe differently."

Everyone throughout history has thought "ah, now we are advanced and knowledgeable and no longer falling for the superstitious nonsense of years past. Yes, truly we have discovered 'truth' in this area of the universe." But the fact that we're still applying language and logic and clinical studies and second and third opinions to the problem of "What the hell is happening inside that person's brain?" says to me that we still have a hell of a way to go, and we're not even on the right trail.

perhaps we're no longer doing anything as directly and tangibly negative as we did before, but somehow we're at a place where psychological disorders are nearly cool, and more and more people are being drugged, treated, whatever. Perhaps the symptoms are more efficiently staunched, but we're causing them faster than ever.


Quote from: Drakonis
Everybody should just <3.

Offline harvey danger

  • Machinae Prime
  • *****
  • Posts: 4289
  • Karma: 49
  • Gender: Male
  • Werd
Re: You don't have the right...
« Reply #27 on: February 19, 2007, 12:00:47 am »
perhaps we're no longer doing anything as directly and tangibly negative as we did before, but somehow we're at a place where psychological disorders are nearly cool, and more and more people are being drugged, treated, whatever. Perhaps the symptoms are more efficiently staunched, but we're causing them faster than ever.

We're not causing them faster than ever. Granted, there are certainly different problems today than there were 100 years ago, and that causes different problems as a result. But the mental problems that exist today existed 100 years ago, as well.

100 years ago, there were fewer (almost no) reported accounts of rape in the United States. Does that mean fewer people were actually raped? No, it means that people were less able or less inclined to report the cases, and so society had less knowledge of the problem.

Like you said, in times some eccentric and creative people would have been deemed mentally unfit. As well, people with mental retardation would have been deemed untreatable, or even been called monsters or freaks of nature. The difference is that now we have some means to say "so-and-so individual has so-and-so problem," and go about doing so in a more humane way. Yes. we are still searching for answers. But it's a fallacy to say we've made no progress in the past centuries. There's a reason diseases like polio and the measles have been essentially conquered and those very medications to prevent mental dysfunction work.
That's the problem with heroes, really. Their only purpose in life is to thwart others. They make no plans, develop no strategies. They react instead of act. Without villains, heroes would stagnate. Without heroes, villains would be running the world. Heroes have morals. Villains have work ethic.

Offline PrescriptiveBarony

  • Machinae Prime
  • *****
  • Posts: 2680
  • Karma: 115
  • Gender: Male
  • Let there be blacklight.
Re: You don't have the right...
« Reply #28 on: February 19, 2007, 12:21:33 am »
Sure, schizophrenia and bipolarity have been around for a while. But what about anorexia? borderline personality disorder? adhd? something has changed in the way we think and live that has created new problems. i can pretty much guarantee there aren't any anorexic chicks in Zimbabwe.

regardless, we agree that we haven't found all the answers yet. so then how can we justify taking control of someone's life by not allowing them to end it? who is more selfish: the person for removing himself from the world, or the people around him for not allowing it?

i am not pro-suicide. i am simply having an interesting discussion.


Quote from: Drakonis
Everybody should just <3.

MDX

  • Guest
Re: You don't have the right...
« Reply #29 on: February 19, 2007, 12:36:05 am »
Kill yourself, sure. But be sure nobody gives a fuck about you first, otherwise you're clearly not considering how much they feel for/care/love you. You kill yourself, its no difference to those who love you, you could get killed, same effect, only the person they'd be angry at is themselves or you, more likely? themselves. And if you wanna lay that mental blame on others then you'd better write a nice letter beforehand, but i really don't support suicide, i think its a sad state to come to when you believe you wanna leave this world, theres plenty of solutions, suicide should never be one of them, never mind the last one.


But youre entitled to your opinions and thats fair play to me, but i just dont (Y) it.