Nitschke v Abbott (1 Viewer)

[Riet]

Palative care is shitty and unlike 95% of people here I have first hand experience with this. A gradual morphine overdose is in no way dignified or beneficial for anyone.

 

[Iron]

I'm not. Notions of good already exist in both philosophy and law. Most people (except sadists and masochists) accept that unnecessary pain is bad.



Pretty easily if I'm terminally ill or in permanent pain above a certain tolerable thershold.



Easily if it's a secondary justification which depends on a valid primary justification (which was already provided).



Zealot.

Neo-liberal Nazi.

If the pain is necessary to your continued life, it is good.
I'm a 'glass is half full' kinda guy

 

[Riet]

Neo-liberal Nazi.

If the pain is necessary to your continued life, it is good.
I'm a 'glass is half full' kinda guy

Yeah sweet man, it was awesome when my mum was in intolerable pain during the last 2 weeks of her life, and the only time she wasnt was when she was unconscious from opiates. Yeah man, it was good when I had to see the undignified shadow of my former, beautiful and radiant mother. Yeh it was good for 2 weeks our family had to bear the emotional strain of knowing that someone we love dearly was in great discomfort and that while it would end, we had no idea when.

 

[katie tully]

Neo-liberal Nazi.

If the pain is necessary to your continued life, it is good.
I'm a 'glass is half full' kinda guy

No, it's not. And it gets to a stage where the highest dosages are ineffective and leave the person totally immobile, both due to pain and due to the morphine.

Allowing people to choose the legal right to die doesn't mean that all people with terminal illnesses are going to get knocked on the head.

Continued life does not guarantee quality of life. What purpose does live hold if you spend the remaining months of your life in debilitating pain, totally dependent on others?

 

[Iron]

Yeah sweet man, it was awesome when my mum was in intolerable pain during the last 2 weeks of her life, and the only time she wasnt was when she was unconscious from opiates. Yeah man, it was good when I had to see the undignified shadow of my former, beautiful and radiant mother. Yeh it was good for 2 weeks our family had to bear the emotional strain of knowing that someone we love dearly was in great discomfort and that while it would end, we had no idea when.

I'm sorry for your loss Riet. I wont press the point here, now knowing your emotional involvement.

 

[Riet]

Oh no, please continue. Just thought I'd state my first hand opinions. Generally I hate appeals to emotions in an argument but this topic is obviously one that strikes close to home. As long as we argue respectfully I will not be offended.

 

[Trefoil]

If the pain is necessary to your continued life, it is good.

Why?

 

[Riet]

Why?

Exactly. When death is an inevitability (and not in the sense of we are all eventually going to die, but as in, a soon to happen event), what good does a prolonged period of duress bring?

 

[incentivation]

Legalisation presents far too many complexities.

How do we develop the measures of assessment for euthanasia qualification?

How can a person lacks lucid thought, and is driven by emotion, make a rational decision such as the taking of their life?

How do we prevent murder?

I agree with Abbott on the question of suicide. It sends the completely wrong message to the rest of society.

I'm probably being a bit alarmist.

I do see the reasoning for legalisation and do acknowledge it isn't a black or white issue. I just think it creates a legal and moral dilemma.

 

[Trefoil]

Legalisation presents far too many complexities.

No it doesn't.

And since when has "oh I'm too lazy to write up a regulatory framework for that so let's make it illegal" been a valid excuse?

I agree with Abbott on the question of suicide. It sends the completely wrong message to the rest of society.

And what would this 'wrong message' be? Perhaps "If you're terminally ill and in chronic pain, you now have the freedom to end that pain"?

 

[Iron]

Oh no, please continue. Just thought I'd state my first hand opinions. Generally I hate appeals to emotions in an argument but this topic is obviously one that strikes close to home. As long as we argue respectfully I will not be offended.

Sure. I cant claim to have such a direct and powerful experience, but I strongly believe that euthanasia is a false solution to suffering. I really do. The real solution is showing love such as yours, which helps us face pain and agony in a humane way.

I state this respectfully, but when Christ died on the cross, he did it for love and in that act he gave great and powerful meaning to all human suffering. God sees the suffering of both the ill and those who comfort them. These tears are not spilled in vain my noble friend.

 

[katie tully]

Why else would somebody make the decision to end their life? Of course emotion is going to factor into it. I'd be pretty emotional if I knew I were dying, and that my death would be prolonged and painful.

If we knew how to prevent murder, do you not think we'd have done it by now? Do you honestly think that euthanasia is going to raise the homicide rate in Australia? Har, har, har, be reasonable.

 

[Trefoil]

Sure. I cant claim to have such a direct and powerful experience, but I strongly believe that euthanasia is a false solution to suffering. I really do. The real solution is showing love such as yours, which helps us face pain and agony in a humane way.

I state this respectfully, but when Christ died on the cross, he did it for love and in that act he gave great and powerful meaning to all human suffering. God sees the suffering of both the ill and those who comfort them. These tears are not spilled in vain my noble friend.

So in other words your argument has a religious basis not a rational one?

I mean that seriously. How can you expect us to except your argument rationally if we don't have the same type and level of faith as you do (and most Australians don't). Do you actually have any practical reasons for opposing euthanasia?

 

[Iron]

So in other words your argument has a religious basis not a rational one?

I mean that seriously. How can you expect us to except your argument rationally if we don't have the same type and level of faith as you do (and most Australians don't). Do you actually have any practical reasons for opposing euthanasia?

One day youll conceed that faith is rational.

 

[Riet]

Unncessary suffering is fine because jesus loves us, it's so clear now.

 

[Trefoil]

One day youll conceed that faith is rational.

Nope. There's nothing rational about claiming "I want you to keep suffering till your body shuts down because I love you."

 

[incentivation]

I don't think he wants you to 'except' anything.

He holds certain views based on his own religious and moral grounding. If that makes him 'irrational' then society is headed for the dog house.

As for your comments about a framework, I made reference to various problems after the statement you quoted. I suggest you comment on the problems associated with the creation of a legal framework rather than making sweeping statements.

 

[katie tully]

Nope. There's nothing rational about claiming "I want you to keep suffering till your body shuts down because I love you."

My love will comfort you during these last few months of unmeasurable pain and suffering!

I'm doing you a favour by loving you! Love will absolve your suffering! Just wait, when you finally die, you'll thank me for letting you live a bit longer!

 

[Iron]

Joke all you want, but Christ is present in that endured suffering, that sacrifice for the sanctity of life, and it is only though Him, through this way and truth and life, that we get to the Father.

 

[katie tully]

Joke all you want, but Christ is present in that endured suffering, that sacrifice for the sanctity of life, and it is only though Him, through this way and truth and life, that we get to the Father.

Shush now, the grown ups are talking.