Do you really have a right to life if you don't also have a right to death?

[Delta4Embassy]

No, not at all. Without the right to die, there can be no right to life, or even a right to live as you see fit. There is only a government mandate that you shall be alive, and that you shall continue to maintain that condition for the pleasure of the government, at any and all expense.

What a crazy world we live in, when liberal California pulls one of the century's greatest victories for minimizing government intervention into people's personal choices.

California governor signs assisted-dying bill - CNN.com

Great, now we can look fowards to comedic "went in the wrong office. Meant to get some x-rays got offered a suicide pill."

 

[SwimExpert]

You just replied with a fallacy of authority. You have none. The concept of reciprocity is quite clear. You are arguing that each are equal in rights thus deserve the same reciprocity under the law. False. Run along.

Are you trolling, or are you seriously that uneducated. There is no "fallacy of authority." There is a fallacy called appeal to authority, which refers to invoking an expert's opinion in a field in which he's not an expert. Like using Einstein's opinion to support the existence of God. Or making a commercial where a star athlete tells you that a particular brand of underwear are the best.

 

[SwimExpert]

Illogical.

The Right to Life is about protecting lives that cannot defend themselves.

Since when? If I have a right to life, it has nothing to do with me defending other people, or other people defending me, or whether or not either can defend themselves. Where in the world did you get this cockamamie idea?

 

[SwimExpert]

I saw a documentary about the incredible amount of people who commit suicide off the Golden Gate bridge. In a rare case a survivor related how he changed his mind after he jumped. On the way down he realized he wanted to live. What happens when a Dr. "Feelbad" hits the switch and you suddenly realize you don't want to die?

Reminds me of the time when I went home from the club with this one chick......after hitting it from behind for a few minutes and realizing just how much of a fat ass she had, I changed my mind and wanted to undo what I had done.

Look, nobody said that choosing to end one's life is a decision that should be made lightly. People smoke cigarettes for decades and say they don't care if it's unhealthy, and when they get cancer they suddenly wish realize that they do care after all. Your objection is based entirely on your own personal fears. People deserve the freedom to make their own decisions.

It's also worth noting that the scenario you describe has more to do with the fear of pain and suffering than it does an aversion to death.

 

[JakeStarkey]

You just replied with a fallacy of authority. You have none. The concept of reciprocity is quite clear. You are arguing that each are equal in rights thus deserve the same reciprocity under the law. False. Run along.

Are you trolling, or are you seriously that uneducated. There is no "fallacy of authority." There is a fallacy called appeal to authority, which refers to invoking an expert's opinion in a field in which he's not an expert. Like using Einstein's opinion to support the existence of God. Or making a commercial where a star athlete tells you that a particular brand of underwear are the best.

You did not take the class(es) did you? You certainly don't get it, that fallacy is of any sort that is inherently illogical. You are not authority, thus when you speak as if you are then you are committing a fallacy of authority. You are not self-evident truth,nor am I. That is what I have just explained to you.

You have not justified your argument for reciprocity in value and right in life and death.

 

[Rocko]

If people were allowed to commit suicide that would send the wrong message to society...and unfortunately many people would give up hope and commit suicide that would otherwise not if the act of suicide were illegal.

 

[JakeStarkey]

If people were allowed to commit suicide that would send the wrong message to society...and unfortunately many people would give up hope and commit suicide that would otherwise not if the act of suicide were illegal.

Rocco, that is you opinion. So what? Why is your argument valid? Why is suicide not a valid option in certain circumstances?

 

[Rocko]

If people were allowed to commit suicide that would send the wrong message to society...and unfortunately many people would give up hope and commit suicide that would otherwise not if the act of suicide were illegal.

Roco, that is you opinion. So what? Why is your argument valid? Why is suicide not a valid option in certain circumstances?

Under certain circumstances I believe it's valid...for example some who is in pain with a terminal illness...but I don't believe in giving people the right to arbitrarily decided when they want to kill themselves under all circumstances.

 

[SwimExpert]

You did not take the class(es) did you? You certainly don't get it, that fallacy is of any sort that is inherently illogical.

Oh boy, you really are barking up the wrong tree. In fact, I have more education on the study of logic than the vast majority of people. Until recently I had saved more textbooks on logic than probably most people have total books in their home.

Let's take your assertion: "that fallacy of any sort that is inherently illogical."

Here, you demonstrate just how poorly informed you are on the subject. Your statement itself is barely intelligible. You can't articulate a description, much less a more formalized definition, of what is a fallacy. And your poor attempt to offer up a broad and vague general description falls flat as being circular.

Allow me to help you on this point. A fallacy is a flaw in reasoning. In logic, there are two categories: formal fallacies and informal fallacies. Formal fallacies are flaws in the logical structure of an argument. An informal fallacy is a flaw in reasoning that is not directly tied to the argument's logical structure; essentially they are persuasive for non-logical reasons.

That you do not accept the conclusions of an argument does not mean that the argument is a fallacy, and does not justify assigning the name of any fallacy whatsoever simply because you choose to not accept it. Whether a fallacy exists is inherent to the argument itself, regardless of your personal decisions about the conclusion.

You are not authority, thus when you speak as if you are then you are committing a fallacy of authority.

Your fallacy here is called "straw-man." I never claimed to be an authority.

Furthermore, you are factually incorrect. There is no such thing as "fallacy of authority." I already told you this. If you don't want to believe me, go pick up a textbook. The fallacy is called "appeal to authority." And it does not apply to anything I have said.

Additionally, your position would demand that nobody could ever state an opinion or position on anything, ever. In fact, your own statements would need to be rejected, because you are not an authority.

You are not self-evident truth,nor am I. That is what I have just explained to you.

You have not justified your argument for reciprocity in value and right in life and death.

Enough with your word salad. You sound like a damned fool.

 

[SwimExpert]

If people were allowed to commit suicide that would send the wrong message to society.

Freedom sends the wrong message to society?

and unfortunately many people would give up hope and commit suicide that would otherwise not if the act of suicide were illegal.

Yeah, because making guns illegal sure stops bad guys from killing innocent people.

 

[Rocko]

If people were allowed to commit suicide that would send the wrong message to society.

Freedom sends the wrong message to society?

and unfortunately many people would give up hope and commit suicide that would otherwise not if the act of suicide were illegal.

Yeah, because making guns illegal sure stops bad guys from killing innocent people.

Is this case freedom does send the wrong message, yes.

What does this have to do with guns? Yes making guns illegal would probably make it harder for bad guys to get guns and there would be less innocent people dead, but being able to protect ourselves, our families and our property is worth the sacrifice. Suicide isn't worth the sacrifice.

 

[JakeStarkey]

swimfrog gives a long dissertation apropos of nothing.

His OP premise is that if one has a right to life, it follows (apropos of nothing swimfrog has posted) that it has a right to death. Nonsense. He does not understand logical construction.

A better argument is that a human has the right to determine his own decisions concerning life and death.

 

[Baron]

No, not at all. Without the right to die, there can be no right to life, or even a right to live as you see fit. There is only a government mandate that you shall be alive, and that you shall continue to maintain that condition for the pleasure of the government, at any and all expense.

Leftists from government shall at first read the Holy Bible: God do not needs morons who want to decide with Him about life or death.

 

[JakeStarkey]

No, not at all. Without the right to die, there can be no right to life, or even a right to live as you see fit. There is only a government mandate that you shall be alive, and that you shall continue to maintain that condition for the pleasure of the government, at any and all expense.

Leftists from government shall at first read the Holy Bible: God do not needs morons who want to decide with Him about life or death.

Far right capital punishment freaks are right in that group of morons.

 

[SwimExpert]

freedom does send the wrong message, yes.

Wow....

 

[SwimExpert]

He does not understand logical construction.

You just keep making stuff up.

You sound like Sassy. You keep repeating nonsense, thinking that it will eventually become true.

 

[Rocko]

freedom does send the wrong message, yes.

Wow....

What is ....? I don't believe absolute thinking, maybe you do. There are some cases is which freedom isn't a good thing. Freedom to commit suicide being one of them.

 

[Katzndogz]

Several human rights groups are trying to get this,on the ballotcto hsve a vote on it.

 

[kaz]

Allowing families to decide for themselves when a loved-one's life has come to an end is consistent with liberal efforts to prevent increasing the size and authority of government at the expense of individual liberty.

When have you ever done that before?

 

[kaz]

If people were allowed to commit suicide that would send the wrong message to society...and unfortunately many people would give up hope and commit suicide that would otherwise not if the act of suicide were illegal.

You seriously think that government telling us they own our bodies and we will do with it as they see fit stops people from committing suicide? Seriously?