19 Nov 03
Originally posted by ivanhoeIvanhoe, it should be clear from all the things I've written that I disagree with Trad's claims. If someone is depressed enough that they want to kill themselves, then they need medication and therapy. Suppose one of Trad's own children (in the example) felt the same way, would Trad just calmly accept his child's 'right to die', of course not. He wouldn't accept it because he knows such suicidal wishes are the result of faulty cognition or mental illness. He would probably feel as though he had an obligation to intervene if his child were suicidal, as we would feel obligated to help him were he suicidal.
Prad: "Regarding the "right to die".
I believe everyone has/should have that right. After all we are not asked to come to this world, we are forced, why would/should you force me to stay? I can go down in flames, becoming an alcoholic, beating my wife, drugs, messing up my kids, or I can go down nicely and just kill myself." Prad
Well Trad and Bba ...[text shortened]...
Maybe you missed these posts and therefore I want to draw your attention to this.
But I've written so much on this now, I'm not going to object when people just state their opinion, especially when I've already provided such objections (and outright refutations) multiple times in both this and the Terri Schiavo thread. So, if I don't directly respond to everyone who makes an error, please don't take that as evidence of some spooky "Slippery Slope", rather it is just a fuction of the fact that sometimes I come to the site to play chess rather than post, and sometimes I get tired of repeating myself.
19 Nov 03
1 edit
Originally posted by bbarrIvanhoe: "So, if these restraints are being removed than you will become a political opponent of those politicians, scholars, scientists, philosophers, lobbyists and even people who call themselves Freethinkers who are advocates of removing these restraints ? ....... Promise ? " Ivanhoe
Ivanhoe, it should be clear from all the things I've written that I disagree with Trad's claims. If someone is depressed enough that they want to kill themselves, then they need medication and therapy. Suppose one of Trad's own children ...[text shortened]... s rather than post, and sometimes I get tired of repeating myself.
You Bbarr, answered "yes" to this question. I'm disappointed to hear that you are allready tired of repeating yourself. The battle has just begun in The United States ... I hope that you will take a long rest and will react in an appropiate way to that way of irrational reasoning both in American Society ánd here in the General Forums in the future ........
19 Nov 03
Originally posted by ivanhoeIvanhoe, I promised to be a political opponent of those who advocate an unrestricted right ot die. As a political opponent I will not vote for any measure allowing an unrestricted right to die, nor will I vote for a person who holds such a view (unless the views of the opposition are even worse). I didn't promise to provide objections to every poorly thought out opinion posted on this topic. If someone provides an argument for a view substantially different than mine, I'll debate with them here in the forums.
Ivanhoe: "So, if these restraints are being removed than you will become a political opponent of those politicians, scholars, scientists, philosophers, lobbyists and even people who call themselves Freethinkers who are advocates of removing these restraints ? ....... Promise ? " Ivanhoe
You Bbarr, answered "yes" to this question. I'm disappointed to ...[text shortened]... l reasoning both in American Society ánd here in the General Forums in the future ........
19 Nov 03
Originally posted by bbarr
Ivanhoe, I promised to be a [b]political opponent of those who advocate an unrestricted right ot die. As a political opponent I will not vote for any measure allowing an unrestricted right to die, nor will I vote for a person who holds such a view (unless the views of the opposition are even worse). I didn't promise to provide objections to every poorly ...[text shortened]... gument for a view substantially different than mine, I'll debate with them here in the forums. [/b]
I'm looking forward to this discussion !
19 Nov 03
Originally posted by ivanhoeCorrect. For instance, suppose someone suffers a terrible accident and as a result loses all capacity for mentality. They remain a human being, but in my opinion are no longer a person. Similarly, early in the pregnancy I think the fetus lacks the capacity for mentality sufficient for personhood. By definition the fetus is a human being, but does not qualify as a person. This changes, however, as the pregnancy progresses. This is why I think late abortions should be subject to the restrictions I mentioned above.
In order to understand what you are saying I need to ask you a question:
Reading your post about abortion and potential persons I have to come to the conclusion that, in your opinion, there are human beings who are not persons. Am I correct ?
Additionally, not all persons are human beings. I think many of the other primates are persons, for instance. Certainly we could imagine beings from other planets who, though biologically quite distinct from humans, nevertheless would qualify as persons.
19 Nov 03
Originally posted by bbarrWhat about sufficiently mentally capacious non-organic matter? Is, for example, the fictitious HAL 9000 a person?
Correct. For instance, suppose someone suffers a terrible accident and as a result loses all capacity for mentality. They remain a human being, but in my opinion are no longer a person. Similarly, early in the pregnancy I think the fetus lacks the capacity for mentality sufficient for personhood. By definition the fetus is a human being, but does not quali ...[text shortened]... nets who, though biologically quite distinct from humans, nevertheless would qualify as persons.