Euthanasia, by roller coaster, or other means

Euthanasia, by roller coaster, or other means (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

TheHeretic -> Euthanasia, by roller coaster, or other means (3/2/2012 8:11:02 PM)
A rather twisted character going for his art degree has designed a killer roller coaster. Literally. You can watch the 3 minute video, or just inhale the wikipedia version, as you prefer. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lSEXmhldXQE http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euthanasia_Coaster Personally, I think his design suffers from a critical flaw. The two minute climb to the top of the 1600 foot drop needed to achieve "terminal velocity," allows WAAAAY too much time to think about what is coming. Electromagnetic launch is the only way to go. [;)] Beyond the craziness of the coaster idea, what are your thoughts on euthanasia, for the terminally ill, and the terminal in general? Simply way too risky a precedent to set? Should it be legal as a strictly personal, and completely voluntary decision? Mandatory, for those who don't share your political views and opinions? To be determined by private insurance companies that have to compete in a market, or faceless bureaucrats in a government monopoly that only have the vague possibility of the torches and pitchforks to restrain them? Who decides? How do they decide? It isn't an easy sort of thing. Families are forced to make decisions about the withdrawal of life support every day. My brother is going to be beating himself to death for years, over the decision he was forced to make alone for his father. We draw this stupid line that says it is perfectly ok to pull the respirator tube and let people spend their last half hour in an awful suffocation, but not to just shoot them up with a heroin heavy cocktail, and send them on their way. Conversely, we can take the heroic measures route successfully, and condemn our loved ones to the nightmare for all, of the drooling years. We've seen enough violent, terrified, Alzheimers, and slow, awful cancers at this point, that most of my younger family members and I have a little code we use, when the the subject comes up. The tip of the index finger, tapped twice at the base of the skull. Just take me out.

MasterG2kTR -> RE: Euthanasia, by roller coaster, or other means (3/2/2012 8:25:37 PM)
Hey....they could call it the Kevorkian Koaster

SoftBonds -> RE: Euthanasia, by roller coaster, or other means (3/2/2012 8:48:11 PM)
I think that anyone who does not wish to be alive should not be forced to remain alive. It is a very personal belief for reasons I won't go into on a public forum, but it is part of who I am. The idea of someone in constant pain just so that moralists can claim that they are "protecting life," is silly. You have to have compassion for the person who is in pain. I completely agree with the idea of morphine overdose as the way to go. For that matter, I think that's how we should do lethal injections too. Forget the paralytic, just give the guys a massive overdose of Heroin. Then again, I once proposed that we takes the gloves off in the war on drugs, and dump all the drugs we've seized on the street for free. My theory was half the users would OD once they had a big supply, and the other half would hide their supply and not need to buy for a while, ergo: dealers go out of business... Once the problem gets bad again, rinse and repeat.

DarkSteven -> RE: Euthanasia, by roller coaster, or other means (3/2/2012 8:50:21 PM)
It's one of those issues that I keep dodging. I'd hate to make a decision like that. quote: ORIGINAL: SoftBonds I think that anyone who does not wish to be alive should not be forced to remain alive. Ever knew anyone depressed enough to be suicidal? I've known some, including my sub, that attempted suicide when depressed.

SoftBonds -> RE: Euthanasia, by roller coaster, or other means (3/2/2012 9:05:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven It's one of those issues that I keep dodging. I'd hate to make a decision like that. quote: ORIGINAL: SoftBonds I think that anyone who does not wish to be alive should not be forced to remain alive. Ever knew anyone depressed enough to be suicidal? I've known some, including my sub, that attempted suicide when depressed. Yes, and I still hold by my stance. Sent you a PM for why... Once you read it, you will hopefully understand why my view on that will never change.

Owner59 -> RE: Euthanasia, by roller coaster, or other means (3/2/2012 9:11:01 PM)
The guy creeps me out.

erieangel -> RE: Euthanasia, by roller coaster, or other means (3/3/2012 1:03:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven It's one of those issues that I keep dodging. I'd hate to make a decision like that. quote: ORIGINAL: SoftBonds I think that anyone who does not wish to be alive should not be forced to remain alive. Ever knew anyone depressed enough to be suicidal? I've known some, including my sub, that attempted suicide when depressed. Steven, that was my first thought as I was reading the previous post. However, there is a difference between being depressed and being terminally ill or suffering from some ailment that causes chronic, debilitating pain (or even marginal quality of life for that matter). I'm all for assisted suicide in cases of the latter, but not of the former. For some reason our culture tells us that we must dissuade anybody who wants to die, for any reason. Most of the time it is just selfishness on our part; we say stuff "I don't want lose you" and other selfish platitudes. But if a person can demonstrate that they are mentally and emotionally "with it" and they still want to end their life, why should that person's loved ones, or society have any say in the matter?

SoftBonds -> RE: Euthanasia, by roller coaster, or other means (3/3/2012 7:13:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: erieangel Steven, that was my first thought as I was reading the previous post. However, there is a difference between being depressed and being terminally ill or suffering from some ailment that causes chronic, debilitating pain (or even marginal quality of life for that matter). I'm all for assisted suicide in cases of the latter, but not of the former. For some reason our culture tells us that we must dissuade anybody who wants to die, for any reason. Most of the time it is just selfishness on our part; we say stuff "I don't want lose you" and other selfish platitudes. But if a person can demonstrate that they are mentally and emotionally "with it" and they still want to end their life, why should that person's loved ones, or society have any say in the matter? this^^^

calamitysandra -> RE: Euthanasia, by roller coaster, or other means (3/3/2012 8:16:37 AM)
I do like the way the Netherlands handle this. Yes, I know, it is Wikipedia. But it gives a good overview.

vincentML -> RE: Euthanasia, by roller coaster, or other means (3/3/2012 1:10:19 PM)
Here is a Film that had this issue as its centerpiece OMG, Rich, we seem to be in agreement on another issue!!!

GrandPoobah -> RE: Euthanasia, by roller coaster, or other means (3/4/2012 1:37:43 AM)
In Oregon, a state in the US, there is a program entitled Death with Dignity. The premise is pretty simple. If you're diagnosed with a terminal illness, and 6 months or less to live, you can be prescribed a lethal prescription. It requires some simply precautions...a second opinion, and a couple other minor details Doctors and pharmacists have the option to not prescribe or fill the prescriptions on personal belief grounds, but that's not been a major problem. In a quick summary, it simply works. The important thing to remember is that this law, and others like it, don't change anything. In short, people have always had the "right" (ability) to terminate their own lives. You or I could do that right this minute. Whatever you believe about the moral aspects of suicide, the fact is you can do it. However, because of most legal systems, there are some things you can't do, and therein are the problems. 1. In most countries, if you decide to "say good-bye" your family better not be anywhere near you...because they can be criminally charged. So, you tell no one, and make certain they're somewhere far away. 2. Most available methods involve making a mess. Guns, gas, a car crash, jumping all involve making a mess, and that certainly isn't a nice thing to leave for your loved ones to deal with. 3. If you're "disabled" by your condition, you may not be able to self-administer your chosen method. The true effect of the Oregon law is simple. It removes those "problems." So, in a much more humane situation, you can gather your family around you, say your good-byes and hear them speak theirs, and then, simply "take some pills." If necessary, they can assist you. You drift off, perhaps holding the hand of someone special, or maybe holding a "special pet." Your body is intact and unscathed. Doesn't that sound so much more civilized? Nothing's really changed, except all those things that truly matter. As a side note, the man who led the charge to enact this law just recently was diagnosed as terminal. He has asked for the prescription, although he admits he may or may not actually use it. He did say, as other have before, that simply knowing it's always an option makes preparation for passing so much easier.

Toppingfrmbottom -> RE: Euthanasia, by roller coaster, or other means (3/4/2012 1:54:52 AM)
I'd support euthanasia for terminally I'll or those with poor quality life due to a disease.

DaddySatyr -> RE: Euthanasia, by roller coaster, or other means (3/4/2012 3:02:20 AM)
I have been saying for years that a person, wanting to die is not proof that they are insane. It's circular logic. I think it needs to be understood that those with mental/emotional issues should be "weeded out" and not allowed to avail themselves of this option - as a matter of protecting them because they are in no position to make a rational decision. Like I said; I've believed for years that this is not a bad thing. People have a God-given right of free choice that no government should curtail. I have believed that for years and still do, even in the face of new information. It is not up to government or society to decide when a rational person is allowed to decide that they have had enough. Personally, I have also always thought that life is precious; it's something that should be defended vehemently. I have always believed that where there's life, there's hope. There's a very odd quote - odd because the person who uttered it isn't usually very quotable if you want to be taken seriously - that speaks directly to this (in my mind): "You were put on earth to live; not to just survive" ... Robert Craig "Evel" Knievel. I have watched family members and friends waste away because of what I consider to be silly ideas about "mortal sins" and because of society/government's inability to let go of the idea that we answer to them and not vice-versa. My best friend's dad, after two heart attacks, couldn't be saved by an operation because of the cancer, tearing up his body and because of silly religious dogma would suffer, 20 hours per day, "thanking" God for the pain he was suffering. It made me furious. That's not living. It's dying and I think if we took it out of the context we're in right now and just walked up to our friends and said: "Hey, do you look forward to dying? Do you want to drag it out, as long as possible?", we'd get almost all "Nae" answers. To me, this is a no-brainer. When a person who is capable of making an informed, rational decision decides it's time to say "Good-bye", we wish them well and celebrate what their life was; not what we want it to be. Peace and comfort, Michael

latinaPrincess -> RE: Euthanasia, by roller coaster, or other means (3/4/2012 3:32:45 AM)
For dealing with ''over population, or if life becomes too long '' ..... I think he meant to name it the genocide roller coaster ! Euthenasia doesn't include dealing with over population! smh

DaddySatyr -> RE: Euthanasia, by roller coaster, or other means (3/4/2012 3:42:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: latinaPrincess For dealing with ''over population, or if life becomes too long '' ..... I think he meant to name it the genocide roller coaster ! Euthenasia doesn't include dealing with over population! smh After some additional thought. I think your assertion is correct (and the fact that you're hotter than the hinges of hell didn't affect my deliberation, at all. ¡Oye! ¡Que linda, señora!). Peace and comfort, Michael

GreedyTop -> RE: Euthanasia, by roller coaster, or other means (3/4/2012 6:20:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: latinaPrincess For dealing with ''over population, or if life becomes too long '' ..... I think he meant to name it the genocide roller coaster ! Euthenasia doesn't include dealing with over population! smh yeah, that jumped out at me, too.

Musicmystery -> RE: Euthanasia, by roller coaster, or other means (3/4/2012 7:16:37 AM)
quote: I have been saying for years that a person, wanting to die is not proof that they are insane. It's circular logic. I think it needs to be understood that those with mental/emotional issues should be "weeded out" and not allowed to avail themselves of this option - as a matter of protecting them because they are in no position to make a rational decision. Additionally, you have weed out those hurrying Grandma's estate into their waiting hands.

TheHeretic -> RE: Euthanasia, by roller coaster, or other means (3/4/2012 8:05:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Additionally, you have weed out those hurrying Grandma's estate into their waiting hands. There certainly is that to consider, Muse, but on the flip side of the coin, would Grandma, when her mind was still whole, have preferred her children and grandchildren see the benefit of what she and Grandpa worked for their whole lives, or that it go into the coffers of a nursing home conglomerate that charges $5000 a month so she can wander their secure wing, smelling urine and disinfectant all day?

DaddySatyr -> RE: Euthanasia, by roller coaster, or other means (3/4/2012 1:03:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery quote: I have been saying for years that a person, wanting to die is not proof that they are insane. It's circular logic. I think it needs to be understood that those with mental/emotional issues should be "weeded out" and not allowed to avail themselves of this option - as a matter of protecting them because they are in no position to make a rational decision. Additionally, you have weed out those hurrying Grandma's estate into their waiting hands. That is a point well-taken and I guess I should have been more clear. If a person is non-compos mentis, short of a living will, stating their desire to die, I wouldn't support *anyone else* making the decision for them to die. Let me fix this: Only people that are of sound mind or who wrote a living will, when they were should be allowed to avail themselves of this option. In other words; the only "outside" interference should be someone saying: "Sorry, we can't let you do this because ..." Peace and comfort, Michael

erieangel -> RE: Euthanasia, by roller coaster, or other means (3/4/2012 5:21:50 PM)
quote: I think it needs to be understood that those with mental/emotional issues should be "weeded out" and not allowed to avail themselves of this option - as a matter of protecting them because they are in no position to make a rational decision. I need to actually disagree with this assertion. I have bipolar disorder, that doesn't mean I am incapable of making a rational decision...well, sometimes it does, but not always. The point is, should I develop a stage 4 cancer, or some other terminal condition, I would want the option of ending my life in a dignified way rather than have my life slowly consumed with the condition and the treatment that is designed to do nothing more than prolong it. I saw this happen to my mother over the course of 8 months. When she was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer, after years of claiming to be ill, it was already in stage 4. Rather than discuss ways in which she might enjoy her last days, she was again constantly sick from the courses of chemotherapy that the doctors said would do nothing but prolong her life. In the end, she had surgery to scrape an infection from her lungs. She never woke up after that and died a week later. She lasted 5 days after we removed her from all fluids and life support. It was painful to watch.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

6.152344E-02