Total Posts:48|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

A Right To Ones Own Body

pozessed
Posts: 1,034
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2014 8:26:27 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Firstly, I must say that I am a callouse individual when it comes to people who don't care about themselves or life in general. Misery loves company and that's why it hates me.

I am curious how this community feels about peoples right to their own body, and to which extent that right should be taken away. I myself have a strong bias on this topic and wish to elaborate my thoughts a little further.

I feel as though people should have a right to do as they wish to themselves with no legal reprimand as long as they are not directly affecting another persons health with their current drug use. I see no point in keeping things illegal when there is more practical ways to do things. Nobody wants to take a hypocrit seriously, but we do it daily when we adhere to the confines of the law.
I understand my ideal has many social repricussions which would include but are not limited to drug overdoses, possible crime increase, lack of informative drug awareness. I don't know how to fix any of it, I just know it should be all or nothing. I'd prefer all.

I think we should have suicide booths for people who wish to commit suicide. I see no reason to put a whole society of people through the anguish of a loved one dying, nor making a crew of people clean up a crime scene and waste tax payer dollars. I'm not saying make it easy for these people, but I don't see the harm in every state having one.

I'm sorry if I offended anyone in this post, please do realize that is not my goal. If you have lost a loved one due to suicide I offer my condolences to you and I sincerely hope they are in a better place.
monty1
Posts: 1,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2014 10:03:24 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/20/2014 8:26:27 PM, pozessed wrote:
Firstly, I must say that I am a callouse individual when it comes to people who don't care about themselves or life in general. Misery loves company and that's why it hates me.

I am curious how this community feels about peoples right to their own body, and to which extent that right should be taken away. I myself have a strong bias on this topic and wish to elaborate my thoughts a little further.

I feel as though people should have a right to do as they wish to themselves with no legal reprimand as long as they are not directly affecting another persons health with their current drug use. I see no point in keeping things illegal when there is more practical ways to do things. Nobody wants to take a hypocrit seriously, but we do it daily when we adhere to the confines of the law.
I understand my ideal has many social repricussions which would include but are not limited to drug overdoses, possible crime increase, lack of informative drug awareness. I don't know how to fix any of it, I just know it should be all or nothing. I'd prefer all.

I think we should have suicide booths for people who wish to commit suicide. I see no reason to put a whole society of people through the anguish of a loved one dying, nor making a crew of people clean up a crime scene and waste tax payer dollars. I'm not saying make it easy for these people, but I don't see the harm in every state having one.

I'm sorry if I offended anyone in this post, please do realize that is not my goal. If you have lost a loved one due to suicide I offer my condolences to you and I sincerely hope they are in a better place.

You didn't offend anyone, you just made a fool of yourself. But fine, if the US wants to descend further down in the pit of immorality it's dug for itself, why should the rest of the world give a fuk.

A suicide booth in every state! No crime scene clean up, let em rot in the streets. A little black plague would be enlightening to Americans!
pozessed
Posts: 1,034
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2014 10:11:32 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/20/2014 10:03:24 PM, monty1 wrote:
At 3/20/2014 8:26:27 PM, pozessed wrote:
Firstly, I must say that I am a callouse individual when it comes to people who don't care about themselves or life in general. Misery loves company and that's why it hates me.

I am curious how this community feels about peoples right to their own body, and to which extent that right should be taken away. I myself have a strong bias on this topic and wish to elaborate my thoughts a little further.

I feel as though people should have a right to do as they wish to themselves with no legal reprimand as long as they are not directly affecting another persons health with their current drug use. I see no point in keeping things illegal when there is more practical ways to do things. Nobody wants to take a hypocrit seriously, but we do it daily when we adhere to the confines of the law.
I understand my ideal has many social repricussions which would include but are not limited to drug overdoses, possible crime increase, lack of informative drug awareness. I don't know how to fix any of it, I just know it should be all or nothing. I'd prefer all.

I think we should have suicide booths for people who wish to commit suicide. I see no reason to put a whole society of people through the anguish of a loved one dying, nor making a crew of people clean up a crime scene and waste tax payer dollars. I'm not saying make it easy for these people, but I don't see the harm in every state having one.

I'm sorry if I offended anyone in this post, please do realize that is not my goal. If you have lost a loved one due to suicide I offer my condolences to you and I sincerely hope they are in a better place.

You didn't offend anyone, you just made a fool of yourself. But fine, if the US wants to descend further down in the pit of immorality it's dug for itself, why should the rest of the world give a fuk.


Right, it's shows moral aptitude to dictate other peoples lives.

A suicide booth in every state! No crime scene clean up, let em rot in the streets. A little black plague would be enlightening to Americans!

I was thinking cremation, but sure...
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2014 12:49:27 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/20/2014 8:26:27 PM, pozessed wrote:
Firstly, I must say that I am a callouse individual when it comes to people who don't care about themselves or life in general. Misery loves company and that's why it hates me.

I am curious how this community feels about peoples right to their own body, and to which extent that right should be taken away. I myself have a strong bias on this topic and wish to elaborate my thoughts a little further.

I feel as though people should have a right to do as they wish to themselves with no legal reprimand as long as they are not directly affecting another persons health with their current drug use. I see no point in keeping things illegal when there is more practical ways to do things. Nobody wants to take a hypocrit seriously, but we do it daily when we adhere to the confines of the law.
I understand my ideal has many social repricussions which would include but are not limited to drug overdoses, possible crime increase, lack of informative drug awareness. I don't know how to fix any of it, I just know it should be all or nothing. I'd prefer all.

I think we should have suicide booths for people who wish to commit suicide. I see no reason to put a whole society of people through the anguish of a loved one dying, nor making a crew of people clean up a crime scene and waste tax payer dollars. I'm not saying make it easy for these people, but I don't see the harm in every state having one.

I'm sorry if I offended anyone in this post, please do realize that is not my goal. If you have lost a loved one due to suicide I offer my condolences to you and I sincerely hope they are in a better place.

How do you view "direct harm"? I'm going to guess that it is only referencing physical or economic harm, but what about emotional or psychological harm? What reason is there for those not to be valued? Like it or not, we are biologically social creatures. Our brains naturally create bonds and ties with others (there's a fun and long evolutionary explanation for this). When they do something that is harmful to them, it hurts us. That is just the way we are.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
pozessed
Posts: 1,034
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2014 1:08:18 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/21/2014 12:49:27 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 3/20/2014 8:26:27 PM, pozessed wrote:
Firstly, I must say that I am a callouse individual when it comes to people who don't care about themselves or life in general. Misery loves company and that's why it hates me.

I am curious how this community feels about peoples right to their own body, and to which extent that right should be taken away. I myself have a strong bias on this topic and wish to elaborate my thoughts a little further.

I feel as though people should have a right to do as they wish to themselves with no legal reprimand as long as they are not directly affecting another persons health with their current drug use. I see no point in keeping things illegal when there is more practical ways to do things. Nobody wants to take a hypocrit seriously, but we do it daily when we adhere to the confines of the law.
I understand my ideal has many social repricussions which would include but are not limited to drug overdoses, possible crime increase, lack of informative drug awareness. I don't know how to fix any of it, I just know it should be all or nothing. I'd prefer all.

I think we should have suicide booths for people who wish to commit suicide. I see no reason to put a whole society of people through the anguish of a loved one dying, nor making a crew of people clean up a crime scene and waste tax payer dollars. I'm not saying make it easy for these people, but I don't see the harm in every state having one.

I'm sorry if I offended anyone in this post, please do realize that is not my goal. If you have lost a loved one due to suicide I offer my condolences to you and I sincerely hope they are in a better place.

How do you view "direct harm"? I'm going to guess that it is only referencing physical or economic harm, but what about emotional or psychological harm?

To me, direct harm would not be any of the things you listed. Are you referencing one individual or a multitude?

What reason is there for those not to be valued?

Where did I say I had more or less value for a person?
If a person has no respect for themselves and don't wish to contribute to the society in which they live, why should that society be obligated to respect and contribute to that individual? So if a definition of value must be asserted for your point of view I would conclude a person loses social value when they have no projection of personal value.

Like it or not, we are biologically social creatures. Our brains naturally create bonds and ties with others (there's a fun and long evolutionary explanation for this). When they do something that is harmful to them, it hurts us. That is just the way we are.

Did I imply that we weren't? I'm confused as to why this is being mentioned.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2014 9:01:02 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/21/2014 1:08:18 AM, pozessed wrote:
At 3/21/2014 12:49:27 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 3/20/2014 8:26:27 PM, pozessed wrote:
Firstly, I must say that I am a callouse individual when it comes to people who don't care about themselves or life in general. Misery loves company and that's why it hates me.

I am curious how this community feels about peoples right to their own body, and to which extent that right should be taken away. I myself have a strong bias on this topic and wish to elaborate my thoughts a little further.

I feel as though people should have a right to do as they wish to themselves with no legal reprimand as long as they are not directly affecting another persons health with their current drug use. I see no point in keeping things illegal when there is more practical ways to do things. Nobody wants to take a hypocrit seriously, but we do it daily when we adhere to the confines of the law.
I understand my ideal has many social repricussions which would include but are not limited to drug overdoses, possible crime increase, lack of informative drug awareness. I don't know how to fix any of it, I just know it should be all or nothing. I'd prefer all.

I think we should have suicide booths for people who wish to commit suicide. I see no reason to put a whole society of people through the anguish of a loved one dying, nor making a crew of people clean up a crime scene and waste tax payer dollars. I'm not saying make it easy for these people, but I don't see the harm in every state having one.

I'm sorry if I offended anyone in this post, please do realize that is not my goal. If you have lost a loved one due to suicide I offer my condolences to you and I sincerely hope they are in a better place.

How do you view "direct harm"? I'm going to guess that it is only referencing physical or economic harm, but what about emotional or psychological harm?

To me, direct harm would not be any of the things you listed. Are you referencing one individual or a multitude?

What reason is there for those not to be valued?

Where did I say I had more or less value for a person?

I'm not talking about less value for the person, but less value for those types of harms. You just said you don't count them as direct harm. Why? They can be so much more painful than any physical or economic harm. Why don't they cout?

If a person has no respect for themselves and don't wish to contribute to the society in which they live, why should that society be obligated to respect and contribute to that individual? So if a definition of value must be asserted for your point of view I would conclude a person loses social value when they have no projection of personal value.

Like it or not, we are biologically social creatures. Our brains naturally create bonds and ties with others (there's a fun and long evolutionary explanation for this). When they do something that is harmful to them, it hurts us. That is just the way we are.

Did I imply that we weren't? I'm confused as to why this is being mentioned.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
pozessed
Posts: 1,034
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2014 10:17:55 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/21/2014 9:01:02 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 3/21/2014 1:08:18 AM, pozessed wrote:
At 3/21/2014 12:49:27 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 3/20/2014 8:26:27 PM, pozessed wrote:
Firstly, I must say that I am a callouse individual when it comes to people who don't care about themselves or life in general. Misery loves company and that's why it hates me.

I am curious how this community feels about peoples right to their own body, and to which extent that right should be taken away. I myself have a strong bias on this topic and wish to elaborate my thoughts a little further.

I feel as though people should have a right to do as they wish to themselves with no legal reprimand as long as they are not directly affecting another persons health with their current drug use. I see no point in keeping things illegal when there is more practical ways to do things. Nobody wants to take a hypocrit seriously, but we do it daily when we adhere to the confines of the law.
I understand my ideal has many social repricussions which would include but are not limited to drug overdoses, possible crime increase, lack of informative drug awareness. I don't know how to fix any of it, I just know it should be all or nothing. I'd prefer all.

I think we should have suicide booths for people who wish to commit suicide. I see no reason to put a whole society of people through the anguish of a loved one dying, nor making a crew of people clean up a crime scene and waste tax payer dollars. I'm not saying make it easy for these people, but I don't see the harm in every state having one.

I'm sorry if I offended anyone in this post, please do realize that is not my goal. If you have lost a loved one due to suicide I offer my condolences to you and I sincerely hope they are in a better place.

How do you view "direct harm"? I'm going to guess that it is only referencing physical or economic harm, but what about emotional or psychological harm?

To me, direct harm would not be any of the things you listed. Are you referencing one individual or a multitude?

What reason is there for those not to be valued?

Where did I say I had more or less value for a person?

I'm not talking about less value for the person, but less value for those types of harms. You just said you don't count them as direct harm. Why? They can be so much more painful than any physical or economic harm. Why don't they cout?

If a person has no respect for themselves and don't wish to contribute to the society in which they live, why should that society be obligated to respect and contribute to that individual? So if a definition of value must be asserted for your point of view I would conclude a person loses social value when they have no projection of personal value.

Like it or not, we are biologically social creatures. Our brains naturally create bonds and ties with others (there's a fun and long evolutionary explanation for this). When they do something that is harmful to them, it hurts us. That is just the way we are.

Did I imply that we weren't? I'm confused as to why this is being mentioned.

Could you please answer my questions first, until then I won't know how to answer your question because you have not said if your talking about individual or social harm.
monty1
Posts: 1,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2014 11:10:19 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Ore_Ele, This is not about moral or social values to him. He has to try to put that kind of cover on this kind of extreme rightist thinking. It's all about him and his accomplices worrying about having to fund social programs which rescue people in need for many different reasons.

He's not saying, but would like to say, if a child gets run over by a car it's up to the mother to come and scrape up the remains. It's obviously the child's fault in the minds of the extreme frothing at the mouth right and so no city or government should go to the expense.

Patronizing them is the quickest way to get them frothing, not reasoning with them.
pozessed
Posts: 1,034
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2014 11:56:42 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/21/2014 11:10:19 AM, monty1 wrote:
Ore_Ele, This is not about moral or social values to him. He has to try to put that kind of cover on this kind of extreme rightist thinking. It's all about him and his accomplices worrying about having to fund social programs which rescue people in need for many different reasons.

He's not saying, but would like to say, if a child gets run over by a car it's up to the mother to come and scrape up the remains. It's obviously the child's fault in the minds of the extreme frothing at the mouth right and so no city or government should go to the expense.

Patronizing them is the quickest way to get them frothing, not reasoning with them.

Nothing you said is in correlation with my thoughts. Why don't you ask questions instead of making baseless assumptions.
monty1
Posts: 1,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2014 12:08:43 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/21/2014 11:56:42 AM, pozessed wrote:
At 3/21/2014 11:10:19 AM, monty1 wrote:
Ore_Ele, This is not about moral or social values to him. He has to try to put that kind of cover on this kind of extreme rightist thinking. It's all about him and his accomplices worrying about having to fund social programs which rescue people in need for many different reasons.

He's not saying, but would like to say, if a child gets run over by a car it's up to the mother to come and scrape up the remains. It's obviously the child's fault in the minds of the extreme frothing at the mouth right and so no city or government should go to the expense.

Patronizing them is the quickest way to get them frothing, not reasoning with them.

Nothing you said is in correlation with my thoughts. Why don't you ask questions instead of making baseless assumptions.

You said: "......,nor making a crew of people clean up a crime scene and waste tax payer dollars."

I addressed your OP head on but I didn't ask a question on the above comment taken from your OP. It seemed to be so clear what you meant that I couldn't come up with a question.

But I'm interested on what more you could possibly have to say about that specifically. Let's keep it specific and limited to your expanding on that idea for now. If we can come to some kind of mutual understanding of how that could be desirable for society then perhaps we can move on to more of your ideas.

Here's a question for you. It's the best question I can come up with right now. Who do you propose cleans up the crime scene? The perp's friends or family? The victim's friends or family?
pozessed
Posts: 1,034
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2014 12:18:00 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/21/2014 12:08:43 PM, monty1 wrote:
At 3/21/2014 11:56:42 AM, pozessed wrote:
At 3/21/2014 11:10:19 AM, monty1 wrote:
Ore_Ele, This is not about moral or social values to him. He has to try to put that kind of cover on this kind of extreme rightist thinking. It's all about him and his accomplices worrying about having to fund social programs which rescue people in need for many different reasons.

He's not saying, but would like to say, if a child gets run over by a car it's up to the mother to come and scrape up the remains. It's obviously the child's fault in the minds of the extreme frothing at the mouth right and so no city or government should go to the expense.

Patronizing them is the quickest way to get them frothing, not reasoning with them.

Nothing you said is in correlation with my thoughts. Why don't you ask questions instead of making baseless assumptions.

You said: "......,nor making a crew of people clean up a crime scene and waste tax payer dollars."

I addressed your OP head on but I didn't ask a question on the above comment taken from your OP. It seemed to be so clear what you meant that I couldn't come up with a question.

Ahh, so comparing a suicide victim with an accidental homicide victim are relative in your mind? I never indicated any such thing.

But I'm interested on what more you could possibly have to say about that specifically. Let's keep it specific and limited to your expanding on that idea for now. If we can come to some kind of mutual understanding of how that could be desirable for society then perhaps we can move on to more of your ideas.

Here's a question for you. It's the best question I can come up with right now. Who do you propose cleans up the crime scene? The perp's friends or family? The victim's friends or family?

I proposed a way that there was no crime scene in a suicide case. In an instance of accidental homicide, I see no reason for things to be done different than the way they are I suppose.
KristinaC
Posts: 1
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2014 12:21:55 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I think that people do have the right to their own body, but there still needs to be a concerted effort to discourage harm to the individual. By the way I'm not offended by this post; I've had a sibling almost commit suicide and have contemplated suicide myself, but I think that if a person wants to die there should be some sorta of way to prevent a family having to come across them after the fact ( so the suicide booth thing is not a perfected idea but there should be a place a person can go to where they will do so. And as a barrier to prevent suicides there should be people who are around to try and convince the party not to go though with it. This idea actually exists in Japan where there is the "Forest of Death". It's not a legal place to commit suicide but it is a popular spot where people go to, an the forest rangers there do their best to convince people not to go through with it. Something like that)

Aldo on drugs there need to be not legal repercussions but more effort to discourage it's uses. We need to convince people to stop wanting to do drugs but they have a right to choose to do so.
"If at first you don't succeed, Troy, Troy, again."
- Mr. Peabody and Sherman
monty1
Posts: 1,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2014 12:26:21 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
You said: "......,nor making a crew of people clean up a crime scene and waste tax payer dollars."

And I asked you who you thought should be responsible for cleaning up. You've avoided answering the question and so if you don't answer then I will move on and consider that my earlier assessment of you was correct.
pozessed
Posts: 1,034
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2014 12:40:56 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/21/2014 12:26:21 PM, monty1 wrote:
You said: "......,nor making a crew of people clean up a crime scene and waste tax payer dollars."

And I asked you who you thought should be responsible for cleaning up. You've avoided answering the question and so if you don't answer then I will move on and consider that my earlier assessment of you was correct.

As you wish, but taking half a statement and trying to make it relative to a statement which it was not part of is called lying. What's even crazier, is your proposing to lie to nobody but yourself.
pozessed
Posts: 1,034
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2014 12:52:41 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/21/2014 12:26:21 PM, monty1 wrote:
You said: "......,nor making a crew of people clean up a crime scene and waste tax payer dollars."

And I asked you who you thought should be responsible for cleaning up. You've avoided answering the question and so if you don't answer then I will move on and consider that my earlier assessment of you was correct.

This is my answer to your question, what were you confused about?
pozessed
Posts: 1,034
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2014 1:10:31 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/21/2014 12:52:41 PM, pozessed wrote:
At 3/21/2014 12:26:21 PM, monty1 wrote:
You said: "......,nor making a crew of people clean up a crime scene and waste tax payer dollars."

And I asked you who you thought should be responsible for cleaning up. You've avoided answering the question and so if you don't answer then I will move on and consider that my earlier assessment of you was correct.

I proposed a way that there was no crime scene in a suicide case. In an instance of accidental homicide, I see no reason for things to be done different than the way they are I suppose.
This is my answer to your question, what were you confused about?
monty1
Posts: 1,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2014 1:12:01 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/21/2014 12:52:41 PM, pozessed wrote:
At 3/21/2014 12:26:21 PM, monty1 wrote:
You said: "......,nor making a crew of people clean up a crime scene and waste tax payer dollars."

And I asked you who you thought should be responsible for cleaning up. You've avoided answering the question and so if you don't answer then I will move on and consider that my earlier assessment of you was correct.

This is my answer to your question, what were you confused about?

Thanks! That's a reasonable answer and a good solution to the problem of having taxpayers paying for the clean up. I guess I must have just misunderstood what you were proposing, now I get it.

Oh, and I apologize for lying to you too!
pozessed
Posts: 1,034
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2014 1:27:17 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/21/2014 1:12:01 PM, monty1 wrote:
At 3/21/2014 12:52:41 PM, pozessed wrote:
At 3/21/2014 12:26:21 PM, monty1 wrote:
You said: "......,nor making a crew of people clean up a crime scene and waste tax payer dollars."

And I asked you who you thought should be responsible for cleaning up. You've avoided answering the question and so if you don't answer then I will move on and consider that my earlier assessment of you was correct.

This is my answer to your question, what were you confused about?

Thanks! That's a reasonable answer and a good solution to the problem of having taxpayers paying for the clean up. I guess I must have just misunderstood what you were proposing, now I get it.

Oh, and I apologize for lying to you too!

It's okay, I'm glad you understand my perspective better. Thank you for being patient enough to reconsider my character.
monty1
Posts: 1,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2014 1:35:43 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/21/2014 1:27:17 PM, pozessed wrote:
At 3/21/2014 1:12:01 PM, monty1 wrote:
At 3/21/2014 12:52:41 PM, pozessed wrote:
At 3/21/2014 12:26:21 PM, monty1 wrote:
You said: "......,nor making a crew of people clean up a crime scene and waste tax payer dollars."

And I asked you who you thought should be responsible for cleaning up. You've avoided answering the question and so if you don't answer then I will move on and consider that my earlier assessment of you was correct.

This is my answer to your question, what were you confused about?

Thanks! That's a reasonable answer and a good solution to the problem of having taxpayers paying for the clean up. I guess I must have just misunderstood what you were proposing, now I get it.

Oh, and I apologize for lying to you too!

It's okay, I'm glad you understand my perspective better. Thank you for being patient enough to reconsider my character.

Whoooooaaaaa there! I didn't say anything about reconsidering your character. My opinion on that remains the same. I've only admitted to lying and to understanding who you are going to have cleaning up the mess, regardless of whether it's a suicide or it's a street homicide. And perhaps you may want to include car accidents where there is a lot of blood and guts to clean up?
pozessed
Posts: 1,034
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2014 1:38:35 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/21/2014 12:21:55 PM, KristinaC wrote:
I think that people do have the right to their own body, but there still needs to be a concerted effort to discourage harm to the individual.

The statistics of prison inmates would disagree with that assumption. More people in the U.S are imprisoned for drug offenses than any other crime if I'm not mistaken.

By the way I'm not offended by this post; I've had a sibling almost commit suicide and have contemplated suicide myself,

Thank you for not taking offense, and I'm sorry about whatever your situation may be.

but I think that if a person wants to die there should be some sorta of way to prevent a family having to come across them after the fact ( so the suicide booth thing is not a perfected idea but there should be a place a person can go to where they will do so.

That's exactly my premise. I'm not trying to imply I think I have a perfect idea, but I am only relaying an idea that may lead to better solutions than ones we have now.

And as a barrier to prevent suicides there should be people who are around to try and convince the party not to go though with it. This idea actually exists in Japan where there is the "Forest of Death". It's not a legal place to commit suicide but it is a popular spot where people go to, an the forest rangers there do their best to convince people not to go through with it. Something like that)
I didn't know about the Forest Of Death. However interesting, people still have a chance of finding the body and there is still the possibility someone will have to clean up a mess.

Aldo on drugs there need to be not legal repercussions but more effort to discourage it's uses. We need to convince people to stop wanting to do drugs but they have a right to choose to do so.

I imagine drugs would be easier to control if people had a "controlled party environment" in which they could go. I don't know if/how it would work. I just don't think telling people that something is absolutely forbidden is doing what our politicians expected.
pozessed
Posts: 1,034
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2014 1:44:27 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/21/2014 1:35:43 PM, monty1 wrote:
At 3/21/2014 1:27:17 PM, pozessed wrote:
At 3/21/2014 1:12:01 PM, monty1 wrote:
At 3/21/2014 12:52:41 PM, pozessed wrote:
At 3/21/2014 12:26:21 PM, monty1 wrote:
You said: "......,nor making a crew of people clean up a crime scene and waste tax payer dollars."

And I asked you who you thought should be responsible for cleaning up. You've avoided answering the question and so if you don't answer then I will move on and consider that my earlier assessment of you was correct.

This is my answer to your question, what were you confused about?

Thanks! That's a reasonable answer and a good solution to the problem of having taxpayers paying for the clean up. I guess I must have just misunderstood what you were proposing, now I get it.

Oh, and I apologize for lying to you too!

It's okay, I'm glad you understand my perspective better. Thank you for being patient enough to reconsider my character.

Whoooooaaaaa there! I didn't say anything about reconsidering your character. My opinion on that remains the same.
Fair enough.
I've only admitted to lying and to understanding who you are going to have cleaning up the mess, regardless of whether it's a suicide or it's a street homicide.
Kudos to you.
And perhaps you may want to include car accidents where there is a lot of blood and guts to clean up?
Why? I only mentioned a way to allow suicides to exist in a manner that wouldn't strain society in a financial and visually traumatic affect.
What does that have to do with car accidents?
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2014 2:33:15 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/21/2014 10:17:55 AM, pozessed wrote:
At 3/21/2014 9:01:02 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 3/21/2014 1:08:18 AM, pozessed wrote:
At 3/21/2014 12:49:27 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 3/20/2014 8:26:27 PM, pozessed wrote:
Firstly, I must say that I am a callouse individual when it comes to people who don't care about themselves or life in general. Misery loves company and that's why it hates me.

I am curious how this community feels about peoples right to their own body, and to which extent that right should be taken away. I myself have a strong bias on this topic and wish to elaborate my thoughts a little further.

I feel as though people should have a right to do as they wish to themselves with no legal reprimand as long as they are not directly affecting another persons health with their current drug use. I see no point in keeping things illegal when there is more practical ways to do things. Nobody wants to take a hypocrit seriously, but we do it daily when we adhere to the confines of the law.
I understand my ideal has many social repricussions which would include but are not limited to drug overdoses, possible crime increase, lack of informative drug awareness. I don't know how to fix any of it, I just know it should be all or nothing. I'd prefer all.

I think we should have suicide booths for people who wish to commit suicide. I see no reason to put a whole society of people through the anguish of a loved one dying, nor making a crew of people clean up a crime scene and waste tax payer dollars. I'm not saying make it easy for these people, but I don't see the harm in every state having one.

I'm sorry if I offended anyone in this post, please do realize that is not my goal. If you have lost a loved one due to suicide I offer my condolences to you and I sincerely hope they are in a better place.

How do you view "direct harm"? I'm going to guess that it is only referencing physical or economic harm, but what about emotional or psychological harm?

To me, direct harm would not be any of the things you listed. Are you referencing one individual or a multitude?

What reason is there for those not to be valued?

Where did I say I had more or less value for a person?

I'm not talking about less value for the person, but less value for those types of harms. You just said you don't count them as direct harm. Why? They can be so much more painful than any physical or economic harm. Why don't they cout?

If a person has no respect for themselves and don't wish to contribute to the society in which they live, why should that society be obligated to respect and contribute to that individual? So if a definition of value must be asserted for your point of view I would conclude a person loses social value when they have no projection of personal value.

Like it or not, we are biologically social creatures. Our brains naturally create bonds and ties with others (there's a fun and long evolutionary explanation for this). When they do something that is harmful to them, it hurts us. That is just the way we are.

Did I imply that we weren't? I'm confused as to why this is being mentioned.

Could you please answer my questions first, until then I won't know how to answer your question because you have not said if your talking about individual or social harm.

Individual harm.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
pozessed
Posts: 1,034
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2014 3:07:04 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/21/2014 2:33:15 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 3/21/2014 10:17:55 AM, pozessed wrote:
At 3/21/2014 9:01:02 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 3/21/2014 1:08:18 AM, pozessed wrote:
At 3/21/2014 12:49:27 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 3/20/2014 8:26:27 PM, pozessed wrote:
Firstly, I must say that I am a callouse individual when it comes to people who don't care about themselves or life in general. Misery loves company and that's why it hates me.

I am curious how this community feels about peoples right to their own body, and to which extent that right should be taken away. I myself have a strong bias on this topic and wish to elaborate my thoughts a little further.

I feel as though people should have a right to do as they wish to themselves with no legal reprimand as long as they are not directly affecting another persons health with their current drug use. I see no point in keeping things illegal when there is more practical ways to do things. Nobody wants to take a hypocrit seriously, but we do it daily when we adhere to the confines of the law.
I understand my ideal has many social repricussions which would include but are not limited to drug overdoses, possible crime increase, lack of informative drug awareness. I don't know how to fix any of it, I just know it should be all or nothing. I'd prefer all.

I think we should have suicide booths for people who wish to commit suicide. I see no reason to put a whole society of people through the anguish of a loved one dying, nor making a crew of people clean up a crime scene and waste tax payer dollars. I'm not saying make it easy for these people, but I don't see the harm in every state having one.

I'm sorry if I offended anyone in this post, please do realize that is not my goal. If you have lost a loved one due to suicide I offer my condolences to you and I sincerely hope they are in a better place.

How do you view "direct harm"? I'm going to guess that it is only referencing physical or economic harm, but what about emotional or psychological harm?

To me, direct harm would not be any of the things you listed. Are you referencing one individual or a multitude?

What reason is there for those not to be valued?

Where did I say I had more or less value for a person?

I'm not talking about less value for the person, but less value for those types of harms. You just said you don't count them as direct harm. Why? They can be so much more painful than any physical or economic harm. Why don't they cout?

If a person has no respect for themselves and don't wish to contribute to the society in which they live, why should that society be obligated to respect and contribute to that individual? So if a definition of value must be asserted for your point of view I would conclude a person loses social value when they have no projection of personal value.

Like it or not, we are biologically social creatures. Our brains naturally create bonds and ties with others (there's a fun and long evolutionary explanation for this). When they do something that is harmful to them, it hurts us. That is just the way we are.

Did I imply that we weren't? I'm confused as to why this is being mentioned.

Could you please answer my questions first, until then I won't know how to answer your question because you have not said if your talking about individual or social harm.

Individual harm.

Just to clarify, you want me to explain why I feel suicidal and drug induced people have more or less value compared to what? Do you want my opinion of their value compared to the value of a suicide killer? I'm still confused about what I am appointing value to and why I am giving these things value.
slo1
Posts: 4,318
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2014 3:28:36 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/20/2014 8:26:27 PM, pozessed wrote:
Firstly, I must say that I am a callouse individual when it comes to people who don't care about themselves or life in general. Misery loves company and that's why it hates me.

I am curious how this community feels about peoples right to their own body, and to which extent that right should be taken away. I myself have a strong bias on this topic and wish to elaborate my thoughts a little further.

I feel as though people should have a right to do as they wish to themselves with no legal reprimand as long as they are not directly affecting another persons health with their current drug use. I see no point in keeping things illegal when there is more practical ways to do things. Nobody wants to take a hypocrit seriously, but we do it daily when we adhere to the confines of the law.
I understand my ideal has many social repricussions which would include but are not limited to drug overdoses, possible crime increase, lack of informative drug awareness. I don't know how to fix any of it, I just know it should be all or nothing. I'd prefer all.

I think we should have suicide booths for people who wish to commit suicide. I see no reason to put a whole society of people through the anguish of a loved one dying, nor making a crew of people clean up a crime scene and waste tax payer dollars. I'm not saying make it easy for these people, but I don't see the harm in every state having one.

I'm sorry if I offended anyone in this post, please do realize that is not my goal. If you have lost a loved one due to suicide I offer my condolences to you and I sincerely hope they are in a better place.

You are not just advocating decriminalizing assisted suicide, but also having the state or private enterprise promote it. There is a big problem with that.

Make suicide too easy and one would surmise that suicides would go up simply for the fact that human emotional response can swing drastically. Last thing we need is someone to step in the booth after getting fired from work and leaving a bunch of kids as wards of the state when four months later he would have a job. I would rather help him deal with it then help him kill himself.

Assisted suicide has to be heavily regulated or it has the potential to create more problems to society than it solves. Plus there are no laws against personal suicide. Some countries use to prosecute individuals who attempted it and failed, but that is no longer an issue in the west.

It is one thing to have state regulated assisted suicide for suffering and terminal illness like Oregon has, but it is another issue when it becomes promoted in society and is as easy as stepping into a booth.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2014 4:15:22 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/21/2014 3:07:04 PM, pozessed wrote:
At 3/21/2014 2:33:15 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 3/21/2014 10:17:55 AM, pozessed wrote:
At 3/21/2014 9:01:02 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 3/21/2014 1:08:18 AM, pozessed wrote:
At 3/21/2014 12:49:27 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 3/20/2014 8:26:27 PM, pozessed wrote:
Firstly, I must say that I am a callouse individual when it comes to people who don't care about themselves or life in general. Misery loves company and that's why it hates me.

I am curious how this community feels about peoples right to their own body, and to which extent that right should be taken away. I myself have a strong bias on this topic and wish to elaborate my thoughts a little further.

I feel as though people should have a right to do as they wish to themselves with no legal reprimand as long as they are not directly affecting another persons health with their current drug use. I see no point in keeping things illegal when there is more practical ways to do things. Nobody wants to take a hypocrit seriously, but we do it daily when we adhere to the confines of the law.
I understand my ideal has many social repricussions which would include but are not limited to drug overdoses, possible crime increase, lack of informative drug awareness. I don't know how to fix any of it, I just know it should be all or nothing. I'd prefer all.

I think we should have suicide booths for people who wish to commit suicide. I see no reason to put a whole society of people through the anguish of a loved one dying, nor making a crew of people clean up a crime scene and waste tax payer dollars. I'm not saying make it easy for these people, but I don't see the harm in every state having one.

I'm sorry if I offended anyone in this post, please do realize that is not my goal. If you have lost a loved one due to suicide I offer my condolences to you and I sincerely hope they are in a better place.

How do you view "direct harm"? I'm going to guess that it is only referencing physical or economic harm, but what about emotional or psychological harm?

To me, direct harm would not be any of the things you listed. Are you referencing one individual or a multitude?

What reason is there for those not to be valued?

Where did I say I had more or less value for a person?

I'm not talking about less value for the person, but less value for those types of harms. You just said you don't count them as direct harm. Why? They can be so much more painful than any physical or economic harm. Why don't they cout?

If a person has no respect for themselves and don't wish to contribute to the society in which they live, why should that society be obligated to respect and contribute to that individual? So if a definition of value must be asserted for your point of view I would conclude a person loses social value when they have no projection of personal value.

Like it or not, we are biologically social creatures. Our brains naturally create bonds and ties with others (there's a fun and long evolutionary explanation for this). When they do something that is harmful to them, it hurts us. That is just the way we are.

Did I imply that we weren't? I'm confused as to why this is being mentioned.

Could you please answer my questions first, until then I won't know how to answer your question because you have not said if your talking about individual or social harm.

Individual harm.

Just to clarify, you want me to explain why I feel suicidal and drug induced people have more or less value compared to what? Do you want my opinion of their value compared to the value of a suicide killer? I'm still confused about what I am appointing value to and why I am giving these things value.

Th value of different harms. You said the right to thir body so long as they don't harm others, then you specified what kind of harms were meant by the exception. What about other harms? Why are they not valued as equal to physical or economical harm?
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
monty1
Posts: 1,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2014 7:27:43 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Ore_ele, Why do you respond to such ignorance?

You said: "
Th value of different harms. You said the right to thir body so long as they don't harm others, then you specified what kind of harms were meant by the exception. What about other harms? Why are they not valued as equal to physical or economical harm?"

Don't you understand that his horizons extend no further than his thinking that on drugs and other's rights? Patronizing this sort of fool is going to be more productive than encouraging his stupidity. Are you a lonely old lady? Recently divorced and on social assistance?
pozessed
Posts: 1,034
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2014 8:26:35 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/21/2014 3:28:36 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 3/20/2014 8:26:27 PM, pozessed wrote:
Firstly, I must say that I am a callouse individual when it comes to people who don't care about themselves or life in general. Misery loves company and that's why it hates me.

I am curious how this community feels about peoples right to their own body, and to which extent that right should be taken away. I myself have a strong bias on this topic and wish to elaborate my thoughts a little further.

I feel as though people should have a right to do as they wish to themselves with no legal reprimand as long as they are not directly affecting another persons health with their current drug use. I see no point in keeping things illegal when there is more practical ways to do things. Nobody wants to take a hypocrit seriously, but we do it daily when we adhere to the confines of the law.
I understand my ideal has many social repricussions which would include but are not limited to drug overdoses, possible crime increase, lack of informative drug awareness. I don't know how to fix any of it, I just know it should be all or nothing. I'd prefer all.

I think we should have suicide booths for people who wish to commit suicide. I see no reason to put a whole society of people through the anguish of a loved one dying, nor making a crew of people clean up a crime scene and waste tax payer dollars. I'm not saying make it easy for these people, but I don't see the harm in every state having one.

I'm sorry if I offended anyone in this post, please do realize that is not my goal. If you have lost a loved one due to suicide I offer my condolences to you and I sincerely hope they are in a better place.

You are not just advocating decriminalizing assisted suicide, but also having the state or private enterprise promote it. There is a big problem with that.

I agree that the state and public would have to promote this in some sense. I don't think it should be heavily marketed nor easily accessed. There would obviously have to be restrictions.
I do however think that the states and the public both know that a person committed to suicide is going to commit suicide.

Make suicide too easy and one would surmise that suicides would go up simply for the fact that human emotional response can swing drastically. Last thing we need is someone to step in the booth after getting fired from work and leaving a bunch of kids as wards of the state when four months later he would have a job. I would rather help him deal with it then help him kill himself.

I totally agree. I would think that the only people who can get in the booths would be people that have been contemplating death for many years and only wish to do as little harm to their society as possible.

Assisted suicide has to be heavily regulated or it has the potential to create more problems to society than it solves. Plus there are no laws against personal suicide. Some countries use to prosecute individuals who attempted it and failed, but that is no longer an issue in the west.

I knew we used to prosecute people for attempting suicide. I didn't know we stopped.

It is one thing to have state regulated assisted suicide for suffering and terminal illness like Oregon has, but it is another issue when it becomes promoted in society and is as easy as stepping into a booth.

Again I agree, but just because something is allowed in society does not mean its welcomed and doesn't get ridiculed. Abortion is a good comparison in that small aspect.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2014 8:34:37 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Just want to quickly point out that this...

"I do however think that the states and the public both know that a person committed to suicide is going to commit suicide."

... is not true.

http://www.cracked.com...

Read number 3 of this article... or let me just quote it.

The reasonable person will reply, "But that's not saying anything about guns, Cracked -- if depressed people want to kill themselves, they'll just find another way!"

Actually ... no, they won't. Whether guns are legal or not, whether you believe in gun control or not, here's the most important reason you'll ever hear for not keeping one in your home. It has to do with ovens.

In the first half of the 20th century, ovens in England used to burn coal gas, which happened to be completely lethal in concentrated doses and was thus the preferred way to commit suicide. By the late 1950s, sticking your head in the oven accounted for nearly half of all suicides committed in England. By the early 1970s, these ovens had been phased out, so nobody was surprised to see coal gas fall out of the top ten British suicide methods (one of Cracked.com's least popular recurring articles). So what did all of those suicidal people do instead? In a startling number of cases, they just went right on living. The suicide rate dropped by a third, and it never went back up.

Wait, really? The decision to off yourself is kind of a big one, isn't it? It's not the sort of thing you just wait to do when the opportunity arises and your schedule opens up. Yet you can find plenty of examples of people being inconvenienced right the hell down from the ledge. Adding a suicide barrier to a bridge in Washington lowered not just the number of suicides that occurred on that bridge, but the overall suicide rate (meaning those people didn't just go find another bridge to jump from). A study of more than 500 Golden Gate Bridge jumpers who were stopped in the act found that 94 percent didn't try it again.

Suicides, it turns out, are often split-second decisions -- add even a few minutes' thought or just plain inconvenience to it, and a lot of the victims change their minds.

The article has a bundle of links to support all of these, and I'm not linking each and every one.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
pozessed
Posts: 1,034
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2014 8:53:09 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/21/2014 4:15:22 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 3/21/2014 3:07:04 PM, pozessed wrote:
At 3/21/2014 2:33:15 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 3/21/2014 10:17:55 AM, pozessed wrote:
At 3/21/2014 9:01:02 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 3/21/2014 1:08:18 AM, pozessed wrote:
At 3/21/2014 12:49:27 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 3/20/2014 8:26:27 PM, pozessed wrote:
Firstly, I must say that I am a callouse individual when it comes to people who don't care about themselves or life in general. Misery loves company and that's why it hates me.

I am curious how this community feels about peoples right to their own body, and to which extent that right should be taken away. I myself have a strong bias on this topic and wish to elaborate my thoughts a little further.

I feel as though people should have a right to do as they wish to themselves with no legal reprimand as long as they are not directly affecting another persons health with their current drug use. I see no point in keeping things illegal when there is more practical ways to do things. Nobody wants to take a hypocrit seriously, but we do it daily when we adhere to the confines of the law.
I understand my ideal has many social repricussions which would include but are not limited to drug overdoses, possible crime increase, lack of informative drug awareness. I don't know how to fix any of it, I just know it should be all or nothing. I'd prefer all.

I think we should have suicide booths for people who wish to commit suicide. I see no reason to put a whole society of people through the anguish of a loved one dying, nor making a crew of people clean up a crime scene and waste tax payer dollars. I'm not saying make it easy for these people, but I don't see the harm in every state having one.

I'm sorry if I offended anyone in this post, please do realize that is not my goal. If you have lost a loved one due to suicide I offer my condolences to you and I sincerely hope they are in a better place.

How do you view "direct harm"? I'm going to guess that it is only referencing physical or economic harm, but what about emotional or psychological harm?

To me, direct harm would not be any of the things you listed. Are you referencing one individual or a multitude?

What reason is there for those not to be valued?

Where did I say I had more or less value for a person?

I'm not talking about less value for the person, but less value for those types of harms. You just said you don't count them as direct harm. Why? They can be so much more painful than any physical or economic harm. Why don't they cout?

If a person has no respect for themselves and don't wish to contribute to the society in which they live, why should that society be obligated to respect and contribute to that individual? So if a definition of value must be asserted for your point of view I would conclude a person loses social value when they have no projection of personal value.

Like it or not, we are biologically social creatures. Our brains naturally create bonds and ties with others (there's a fun and long evolutionary explanation for this). When they do something that is harmful to them, it hurts us. That is just the way we are.

Did I imply that we weren't? I'm confused as to why this is being mentioned.

Could you please answer my questions first, until then I won't know how to answer your question because you have not said if your talking about individual or social harm.

Individual harm.

Just to clarify, you want me to explain why I feel suicidal and drug induced people have more or less value compared to what? Do you want my opinion of their value compared to the value of a suicide killer? I'm still confused about what I am appointing value to and why I am giving these things value.

Th value of different harms. You said the right to thir body so long as they don't harm others, then you specified what kind of harms were meant by the exception. What about other harms? Why are they not valued as equal to physical or economical harm?

I don't think people are being arrested for emotional or psychological harm are they? I've heard of businesses or people being sued for it, but not arrested. I could be wrong.
Why should we equate emotional and psychological harm with the criminal offenses of physical or economical harm?
pozessed
Posts: 1,034
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2014 11:10:09 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
If drugs were legal I think their would be criminal offenses against public intoxication, unsafe carrying methods of certain drugs, possession near schools in any way.

I feel that money accumulated from the legalization and distribution of drugs be put into the efforts of health care and social services for the communities that need it most.