I mean it’s not as if some people want to make suicide compulsory, and every person who has committed suicide would not have lived forever anyway.
do you want to commit suicide bob?
Not at the moment, but I would like to have that option if it was going to provide me with an escape from unavoidable suffering.
bob(from black rock) said:
Not at the moment, but I would like to have that option if it was going to provide me with an escape from unavoidable suffering.
I guess people figure, where there’s life, there’s hope. You’d hate for someone to lose 70 years of possibly good times because of momentary trouble or treatable depression.
It could be argued that Jesus Christ committed suicide, he and his Dad knew what was going to happen if he went Jerusalem but he went anyway.
bob(from black rock) said:
It could be argued that Jesus Christ committed suicide, he and his Dad knew what was going to happen if he went Jerusalem but he went anyway.
Sort of a Jihadi Jesus.
given nearly anyone can do it, the question might be..
why make it more subject to the forces of social opinion and render it more mediated by the social field…
bob(from black rock) said:
It could be argued that Jesus Christ committed suicide, he and his Dad knew what was going to happen if he went Jerusalem but he went anyway.
the story of jesus is jumbled and mumbled, theres no logic in anyone dying for man. if jesus was so powerful he wouldn’t need to die.
within Judaism its not uncommon for rabbis to be worshipped by their followers centuries after their death
the Sanhedrin might have been falling off their perch around the time of jesus – Jerusalem and the land of milk and honey had been conquered by rome , with or without jehovahs blessing
I would bet there might have been quite a few religious start ups after the power of Jehovah had been found wanting in the face of the roman legions.
jesus might have been one of the more popular religious leaders that were filling the moral and religious vacuum of the jewish priesthood
the story is rather unusual – they pursued him. the story of herod sending out assassination squads might have been true – there could have been some prophecy of the messiah floating around and he had to put a lid on it from the start. killing the messiah sends a message to followers of a religion. the jewish priesthood needed to kill jesus to make sure their powerbase wasn’t diluted or questioned. in truth they were probably killing as many prophets as they could lay hands on that were half way credible and people were listening to.
from a purely financial perspective , more people following jesus meant less in the coffers for them , they were protecting their investment
if jesus returned to Palestine he would be immediately in some terrible misunderstanding, maybe someone dropped a gun and the bullet went through his skull.
theres too much money involved now
>theres no logic in anyone dying for man.
everyone has a mum and dad, and them mum and dads.
them past and present had and have worked for something free of nasty persecutions and such
for a culturally receptive social creature there’re worse things than death
transition said:
>theres no logic in anyone dying for man.everyone has a mum and dad, and them mum and dads.
them past and present had and have worked for something free of nasty persecutions and such
for a culturally receptive social creature there’re worse things than death
Yeah like running out of beer at 10:00 pm on a Saturday night, back in the 50’s
>Yeah like running out of beer at 10:00 pm on a Saturday night, back in the 50’s
alcohol’s overrated anyway
good for rocket engines and sterilizing, anything much more than a half a beer with a meal’s trending a chemical lobotomy.
a product (industry) looking for a market dumb enough to lobotomize or otherwise injur itself
The opposition is as strong with non-religious people as it is with religious people.
I suppose it’s based on the assumption that physical and mental pain can be cured.
>The opposition is as strong with non-religious people as it is with religious people.
how would that be measured (the opposition), and what exactly would be being measured.
I mean if I presented the question….
How strongly are you opposed to suicide? (and gave a scale one to ten)
In answering what would a respondent really be answering to?
transition said:
>The opposition is as strong with non-religious people as it is with religious people.how would that be measured (the opposition), and what exactly would be being measured.
A point, “right to life” has tended to be heavily religious, but I meant opposition in general, measured by survey questions such as “would you approve of suicide for someone with incurable pain?”.
mollwollfumble said:
transition said:
>The opposition is as strong with non-religious people as it is with religious people.how would that be measured (the opposition), and what exactly would be being measured.
A point, “right to life” has tended to be heavily religious, but I meant opposition in general, measured by survey questions such as “would you approve of suicide for someone with incurable pain?”.
My mother begged me to take her to Darwin. I said you moved too late mum, they’ve already stoppd him.
It is about the law. It is illegal to assist people to take their own life. There are a lot of people who’d happily end their own suffering except they can’t. It is no mean feat to bump oneself off. When one is in incurable pain one needs an easy way to be able to turn out the lights.
bob(from black rock) said:
Not at the moment, but I would like to have that option if it was going to provide me with an escape from unavoidable suffering.
I watched a doco called How to Die in Oregon, which focused on Oregon’s physician-assisted suicide. Basically, when you have a terminal illness, your physician prescribes a drug which will end your life. You’re assigned a volunteer who walks you through the process and acts like a kind of counselor. They have to be present at the end. They prepare the drug but you have to hold the glass to drink it so it’s not suitable for people who have trouble swallowing as a result of some illnesses.
One guy in the doco was diagnosed with terminal prostate cancer and the Oregon govt told him they wouldn’t fund his chemo but they would fund his suicide drug. He went public, there was an outcry, the govt backed down, he died three weeks after starting the chemo. Sure, I understand why the govt sees the expense of palliative chemo to be pointless… but still…
Everyone in the doco (except that aforementioned guy) was glad to have the option of the drug. Many bought it as soon as prescribed and kept it safe until they “knew” it was time; the volunteers always say you know, and the interviewees agreed. One lady had liver cancer and she said she’d hate to be end-stage when there was fluid leaking from all her pores. I thought it would be lovely to see my mother, if she was in the same situation, to be able to end her life the way I remembered her instead of being a gross yellow and leaking fluid at the end of her life.
the government wants people to die quickly after they reach an age where they are of no use to the system
the serfs should die before they hit 65 or soon after serious injury
>A point, “right to life” has tended to be heavily religious, but I meant opposition in general, measured by survey questions such as “would you approve of suicide for someone with incurable pain?”.
yes, I meant opposition in general too