As of now, only Oregon and Washington have assisted suicide laws. Given that Oregon had one first, and then Washington followed suit, that may be the way it spreads: from state to neighboring state. Why? Because it's easier to see that it's working in an adjoining state. Also, adjoining states often have similar cultural values.

What are your views? Anyone here actually against assisted suicide or have grave doubts about it? 


Tags: Oregon, Washington, assisted, suicide

Views: 431

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I'm pro assisted suicide, and against enforced death penalty. It think it would be more humane to allow the convicted person to choose, life in max security prison, without parole or death by preferred method. I say preferred method, because I'm afraid of needles. So If I were on Death Row, I'd like to choose my method. I'd probably go with firing squad, or guillotine. Large caliber bullet to the back of the head, while blindfolded, it's likely that you wont feel a thing, or at least not long enough for it to matter. Guillotine, they can apply a topical anesthetic if you're that nervous, but a 1/4" thick, razor sharp blade that weighs upward to 100 lbs, you won't feel anything at all.

I bring up the death penalty, because it could be bundled with Assisted suicide, and we could make it all about freedom of choice. You don't have the right to end someone else's life, but you have the right to end your own, choose how to do it, and ask someone to help you.

Suppose that, given the death penalty, someone who murders someone HAS chosen suicide, at least as the possible outcome of their choice. 

Giving the murderer a choice of how to die would offend many who remember that the victim wasn't given that choice.

Not necessarily. They get to choose between a 4/6 foot cell, or nonexistence. To be honest, I think those who are pro death penalty don't believe actually punishing murder. Punishment implies the opportunity to learn from the punishment. Death is a way out. Sure it's a scary way out, but since there's no hell or heaven, then what are they learning?

I believe in prisoner rehabilitation, rather than criminal education. Many people who kill someone are actually regretful and, for lack of a better term, repentful. They can be reintegrated into society. What's the point in being an atheist if we aren't receptive to allowing people to learn from their mistakes.

Let me offer the arguments of the opposition.

Many would say that the death penalty isn't about murder that was done, it's about preventing more murders. Many a convicted murderer, upon being released murders again. Even in prison, murderers might murder another prisoner who's in there for a lesser crime. It happens.

Put him in solitary confinement you say? Many of the same people who oppose capital punishment are actively arguing that solitary confinement is cruel and unconstitutional.

Punishment isn't always administered with rehabilitation in mind. It may be done with simple "eye for an eye" justice in mind, and to provide a modicum of satisfaction for the living victims of the murderer, who lost a loved one forever.

To be done properly, releasing a murderer based the suspicion they might have been rehabilitated would require a crystal ball or time machine.

H3xx- "Punishment implies the opportunity to learn from the punishment."

I never heard that particular angle before. One could say that the only thing many convicted felons ever learn is that they should not have been caught. 

Parole boards stick their neck out many times when reviewing a felon for parole. How would you feel if you were a parole board member who authorized the early release of a violent offender who subsequently went back out into the freeworld and committed pedophilia or rape again? Not to mention murder.

Death is "freedom" to a religious person and most that commit murder are of some faith. The other problem is false conviction/execution. If the world was intelligent they would use prisoners for "free" labor, chain gangs and such, what was wrong with these ideas in the first place and with the technology today keeping prisoners in their designated areas wouldn't be hard. This would teach a lesson and punish at the same time and probably help the economy some too?

Well a person can choose to "pull the plug" on a relative and this is not considered murder. If someone is aware of the fact they will never recover or there is no help to them and decide death is the only option available and doctors agree than it simply stands to reason that they are making the same decision as a relative of a comatose patient. It really comes down to choice in the long run.


Support T|A

Think Atheist is 100% member supported

All proceeds go to keeping Think Atheist online.

Donate with Dogecoin



Things you hate.

Started by Devlin Cuite in Small Talk. Last reply by Ari E. S. 1 hour ago. 67 Replies


  • Add Videos
  • View All

Services we love

We are in love with our Amazon

Book Store!

Gadget Nerd? Check out Giz Gad!

Into life hacks? Check out

Advertise with

© 2014   Created by Dan.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service