Alzheimer's isn't being brain dead. I don't think Alzheimer's and happiness are necessarily mutually exclusive.

To the extent that I am capable of happiness, I should not die, if it can be helped. That's how I feel anyway.

I have nothing against those who would wish to live despite Alzheimer's, and I'm sure what remains of them can indeed be happy (at least some of the time). But it seems only fair that those of us who would much rather die than suffer such a fate have our wishes respected too.

I don't feel like getting into an assisted suicide debate during finals time, so I will just state my reasoning to oppose it and be done with it:

The right to life and the right to die are incompatible. Having one corrodes the other.

I will explain: we try to posit that no one has the right to take away my life. All society is built on this norm, if you ask me. On this basis, not even *you* have a right to take away your life. This is because, when you create a society where you have a right to life, if you want it to be taken seriously, the society as a whole has to act to prevent death, including suicide.

That's the argument against suicide in general.

Now to assisted suicide more specifically. It's called a fallacy, but slippery slopes are not always fallacious if you ask me. In this case if assisted suicide is legalized you will see a galvanization of support over time for the idea of a right to die. Just as with, say, medicinal pot leading to recreational pot legalization, legal assisted suicide in cases of terminal illness with certified doctors agreeing etc. etc. could very conceivably lead one day to a movement pushing for the right to kill oneself legally anytime they please. Because of a "right to die."

This however would, as I am saying, corrode the right to life. With such a right (to die), it would be difficult to defend the right to life. For, in a society that allows human-induced, purposeful death, how can one prohibit death (which is what a right to life is - a prohibition of intentional death)?

You are almost certainly unmoved by this argument, but for me it is real. I am usually quite liberal about social freedoms, but this is an area I am not so liberal on. I sympathize with the plight of someone who is in grave pain. I don't mean to be callous to those people. Their plight is an issue I really haven't decided on. Because though their case to peacefully end their lives is compelling, the implications of doing so are extremely troubling. Pulling the plug on a brain dead patient is one thing. Imbibing barbituates after my chemo for pancreatic fails is another, because I am actually still alive in the interim. In pain perhaps, disabled perhaps, but alive all the same.

The secondary argument for me is that life is inherently valuable in that all value is derived from and predicated on the existence of life. A world empty of people would be empty of meaning, obviously. And the cares and triumphs of my own existence are finite to the extent that I have a finite life.

This means that even if my life is, in comparison to others' lives, abysmal, I am yet *alive*, which is a thing to celebrate of itself. You are likely to dismiss this idea as cerebral and small comfort for those in agony of terminal illness. Again, I do not mean to belittle their pitiable situation. And no, I have no experience of having a terminal illness.

But to the extent that our (or I guess my) meaning of life is predicated first and foremost and my own existence, existence itself is valuable. People who are born with debilitating illnesses but live on through the years are, to my mind, informal proof of this idea. They are often, I even hazard to say usually, glad they are alive and thankful. It is usually those who were once healthy and then lost their health and failed to cope that are not happy to live. Not that this is not understandable, I just think that it is worth trying to encourage a gratefulness to even be alive.

Now, because insensitivity is a great sin, I would never literally stand in the presence of a dying person and deny their request to die by saying "try to be grateful you are alive at all." This is obviously callous. But in my own self I have for a number of years been attempting to cultivate this mentality - upon the contingency of my own serious disability of terminal illness, I hope to find the strength to live on and through. There are a number of ways that such an existence can be conceived of as meaningful and worthwhile, if not traditionally "happy."

I am all too aware that many do not feel this way. I am not so presumptuous as to say that I or any other can convince them otherwise. Which is why I am not *vehemently* opposed to legal assisted suicide, but rather hesitant and vigilant.

The above is free thought and not intended to be an argument. I know the refutations, so no need to tell me. It is how I currently feel though. No amount of appeal to the ending the suffering of someone has managed so far to rid me of my own commitment to the idea of a right to life.

I was only able to move away from an anti-abortion position once I was convinced enough that a fetus is not conscious and in that sense not "morally" alive. With a conscious person at the end of their life, it is another matter entirely and I am in much the same philosophical position I have always been in.

Anyway. Like I said I can't really continue this discussion though I would love to at some other time.

Thank you Octavious.

@Thucy See I feel differently. I agree with assisted suicide in certain situations. No ones should have to live in terminal pain for what would be the rest of their life. I don't have the exact guidelines all laid out, but there's a difference in a person who's depressed and needs therapy (I understand not all cases are the same) and a person who knows they'll spend the rest of their lives in horrible immobilizing pain as some MS sufferers will.

It is precisely that uncertainty that makes me wary of the entire concept, CF. I am not willing to go so far as to say this is my position, but part of me thinks that the pain of the people who must suffer through terminal illnesses without intentional suicide is the price we must pay for buying into the idea of a right to life.

There is nothing that says laws cannot be situational. Some people consider suicide for reasons that are non-permanent, and these can be expelled from consideration. However, if you're discussing permanent issues, such as terminal illness or pain, then the "uncertainty" of the effect really isn't there if you ask me...

I should also point out that, supposing for a moment that we were all in agreement that assisted suicide should be illegal, this would not stop up from detesting the circumstances that those in the agony of terminal illness experience. Life is more important that happiness only because happiness is only possible if life is first there. But happiness is our mission as well, so I would argue that the one consolation I could give if I was arguing in favor of keeping assisted suicide illegal is that, if that was the regime we pursued, we should be literally pouring resources into urgently researching ending those people's suffering by means other than death, or into curing them or preventing their plight in the first place.

That, if you ask me, is the real travesty. That we aren't giving more resources to an attempt to alleviate suffering without having to end a life.

See I also see that a person has the right to what they want with their life as well. I wouldn't want someone to impose their beliefs on me so I take great care not to impose mine on anyone else.

@bo_sox: the non-permanence of the rationale for suicide, in my opinion, is not the reason we should be discouraging suicide. Life, after all, is a terminal illness.

Not to mention that what was once called a terminal illness is today called history. (smallpox etc).

Anyway I really do have to go. Thanks for not being assholes about this. I'm usually reluctant to talk about this because people can get extremely nasty on this subject in particular.

Ok one last thing, lol. I think that the "no one should be allowed to impose their beliefs on me" liberal argument is actually a total crock (for more, see my post in draug's money thread on taxes).

We impose our beliefs on each other all the time, and rightly so. Furthermore, we are not islands unto ourselves. So the personal liberty argument for me holds no water at all. The only thing that keeps me from full support for prohibiting AS is the suffering of the people involved.

Nope no reason to get nasty. You have your opinions and I have mine. Better to be able to talk about things like this in a rational manner then froth at the mouth argueing. Leads to better understanding and all that.

@ Thucy

You define the right to life as a prohibition of intentional death. This strikes me as painfully wrong. The right to life is, more than anything else, the right to think and make choices based upon those thoughts. We think therefore we are, we choose therefore we live. As such the right to choose death is not in opposition to the right to life, but in fact a part of it. By denying one you do not strengthen the other. You weaken it.

Life is valued in opposition to death. I don't see how you can get around that opposition. If you no longer oppose all death, how can you value life? If you do not hate death, you do not love life.

I doubt you agree, but it seems fairly apparent to me.

You could broaden it existence is valued in opposition to non-existence but it's far less punch and means the same in this context, I should note.

So for people like me that have seriously contemplated suicide but have moved past that, we are classified as "alien" because we are open to the idea of death yet have also grown to love life. Thanks Thucy.

I often find it truly amazing just how varied are the views from which humans perceive the universe. The world as you see it is so far removed from my own that it's near impossible to believe it's the same place. Loving life without hating death is as easy and natural to me as breathing.

Annnnd it just got ugly, thanks bo_sox. You are not classified as alien. Why do you insist on feeling like I'm attacking you? I was not. I refuse to allow you to anger me. Indeed everything I am saying is based on the idea that I am glad you are still with us. I am glad you moved past it. I have also seriously contemplated suicide. Don't get so caught up with beating me in an online discussion that you become an asshole.

@Octavious:

I feel that my description of things is more what is different, not so much the underlying ideology. You seem to have misunderstood what I meant by hating death. We hate death in that we strive with all our might to avoid it and to prevent it. Not in that we are not at peace with our own mortality or even glad that there is such a thing. I for one believe that it is actually our mortality that gives our lives meaning. If I knew I would never die, life would scarcely be so precious.

A right to life implies hating death in the sense that death is the enemy, not that we don't respect the enemy, just that we understand that, if life is a struggle to survive, death is the adversary.

And if suffering is the opposite of happiness, in the struggle to find happiness, suffering is the enemy, though it too makes happiness more meaningful.

I of course, as I was saying, place life before happiness, because happiness is impossible without life. That's my thinking behind it. The first happiness is existence, the others follow from it.

Lol my friend if you are amazed by the diversity of people's worldviews, I am reluctantly accepting of the total failure of written and spoken language to convey ideas reliably. I often feel no one on this forum understands my views, though I try mightily to express them. Please understand that I am not complaining or bitching here just observing a phenomenon. I wager it's common to us all.

You guys are lucky I have to wait for my data to download, else I would have run clean out of excuses to keep lurking around this great discussion.

Out of curiosity Thucy how do you feel about the death penalty?

"I refuse to allow you to anger me."

Yeah, you failed with that sentiment three sentences later.

"Don't get so caught up with beating me in an online discussion that you become an asshole."

I'm only an asshole when I'm asked to be. Provocation, Thucy. I'm not "glad" to still be here - fact of the matter is that I couldn't force my neck into a rope. Obviously means I wasn't going to do it no matter what method I chose. I am not being an asshole, I am simply stating that you isolated a large mass of people, me included, and if you're to do that to me for just about anything, I'm going to point it out. Don't accuse me for standing up for myself because I'm sure I represent someone else here too.

"And if suffering is the opposite of happiness, in the struggle to find happiness, suffering is the enemy, though it too makes happiness more meaningful."

Suffering is the opposite of happiness, but it's not the same in the sense that happiness is only possible in the fullest form of life. That's oversimplified. Life can happen without happiness, but I haven't got a clue what death genuinely brings. None of us do. That's a philosophy I try not to get into because I frankly don't care what happens after life is over. I'm not religious, but maybe there are two separate spheres of energy in which heaven and hell each exist. Who knows? Ask a dead person and report back.

And don't worry, data rarely convinces me on things I already have a clear viewpoint on from my own experiences.

Totally against it. The only justification that it could have is if it had a demonstrable deterrent effect, and it does not.

@ Thucy

I admit your definition of hate is somewhat different to the definition I'm familiar with, but it doesn't change much in all honesty. Life is a journey, and whether you believe death is the final destination or merely a stop along the way makes it no less part of life. It is not the enemy or something to fight against. It is part of the journey.

Sickness is an adversary, something worthy of hate that we must struggle to overcome. In many cases we can defeat it and return to living as we did before we became ill, often a stalemate is reached where the sickness remains but is manageable, but always we can eventually claim victory over sickness with death.

To put it in some kind of metaphor (which is probably not remotely useful, but I do enjoy this sort of thing) imagine death as a night at the opera which you don't really want to go to but your other half has insisted. You're driving along towards it on the open road with the radio on and the window down, and although you're not keen on getting there you're really enjoying the ride. Sadly as you get closer to your destination you hit heavy traffic and your radio breaks. What was once a fun ride has become a nightmare of stop starts and engine noise that, on balance, is a hell of a lot worse than the opera itself. To your delight you notice a small side road ahead that is clear and will get you out of the traffic and to the opera. Yes, it means getting there quicker than you'd like, but for a brief time you'll be on the open road again with the wind in your hair and it'd be a hell of a lot better than being stuck in the damned jam.

Then traffic cop Thucy closes the road ;).

Oh, and in fairness I think I have a good understanding of many of your world views. Unfortunately I seem to hate almost all of them with every fibre of my being :p. That you have clearly come to your views following a path of trying to be a better person and doing the right thing somehow makes it a lot worse ;).

It is part of the journey, but it's role is as an old adversary. One you respect, because you know it must claim you, but one you fight against in the meantime, because that is your role as a living thing.

"Fighting for your life" is something that your body and you as a person are doing every moment of your life until it's over.

Also no metaphor that takes place in life can adequately represent suicide. Because once you go to the opera, you can still leave afterward and get back to doing things you like.

@ Thucy

That depends entirely on how you view life. The vast majority of people in this world believe quite firmly that life continues after the opera in another form. Even if you don't believe in a god it's clear enough that your influence on this world will continue and be obvious long after you've gone, and in less obvious ways until the end of the universe.

The way you seem time also has an impact. Death is merely the absence of yourself from future presents. Suicide is removing yourself from a future present you don't much care for, which in a way we do every day whenever we make a choice. The saturday 8th December morning in which I spent 5 hours writing a report for work never happened and now never can because I chose for it not to happen. My Friday 7th December at the Christmas Goodwill evening has been written in the fabric of the universe and can never be removed. In the same way I would like to chose for the 20xx year in bed in discomfort without knowing the names of those I love not to happen. I see no reason why others should claim the right to dictate the pattern of my existance to suit their belief system.

I exist and I have existed, and I will continue to exist on my terms. Death is an old friend without whom I would not even be here. He walks with you through life to remind you how to live, and will be with you when it is time to leave. I will leave when I am booted out or I choose to go, but force me to stay and you make life my prison and you my prisoner. Which in a way makes you my adversary, not Death.