Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!
-
@jinpa said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@acrow said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@cvi Unless you get there by euthanasia, in which case you do need to be vaccinated first.
COVID-19 vaccine now mandatory to get euthanized in Germany
'Human closeness, however, is a prerequisite and breeding ground for coronavirus transmission,' said the organization
Sounds like another good reason not to get vaccinated. They can't euthanize you if you're not vaccinated.
Checkmate, governazis!
Legal advice courtesy of
-
Somehow masks are still a thing in some places.
Masks Still Don’t Work
Masks are back in San Diego, California, where the school board has just decreed that students must cover their faces or be barred from setting foot inside a classroom. Never mind that, per CDC statistics and Census Bureau population figures, more than 99.99 percent of children in California (where...
Muller deserves credit for being more honest than most mask advocates. He notes that the World Health Organization said in March 2020 that “there is no evidence” that masks work, and he adds that “it was the absence of significant positive effects from RCTs prior to the pandemic that informed the WHO’s initial [anti-mask] stance.” Yet Muller laments the reliance on RCTs as opposed to “mechanism-based reasoning.” This is a fancy term for applying one’s own reasoning faculties. Muller’s reasoning leads him to be convinced that masks must work. But that, of course, is why we have RCTs: to test people’s notions about what works and what doesn’t.
Muller recognizes that people “may transfer infectious material by touching their faces with unsanitized hands to place and remove a mask,” but this important realization doesn’t seem to affect his conclusions. Instead, he writes, “Mechanism-based reasoning provides a justification for the stance ultimately advocated by the WHO and adopted by many countries.” He admits that the “logic” entailed in such reasoning “relies only on a fairly simple germ theory of disease.” Yet—incredibly—he then asserts that such reasoning “places the burden of proof on those who would argue against recommending masks.” So, even if RCTs provide no evidence for the claim that masks work, even if they continually suggest, on the contrary, that masks don’t work, then health officials should still recommend masks—and probably mandate them—because the claim that they work seems logical to some.
-
@boomzilla said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
Somehow masks are still a thing in some places.
Masks Still Don’t Work
Masks are back in San Diego, California, where the school board has just decreed that students must cover their faces or be barred from setting foot inside a classroom. Never mind that, per CDC statistics and Census Bureau population figures, more than 99.99 percent of children in California (where...
I'll take this opportunity to reiterate my response to that Bangladesh study from another forum: my go-to explanation for a 1% difference in outcomes is that the moon was in the Seventh House and Jupiter aligned with Mars.
-
@GOG said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
the moon was in the Seventh House and Jupiter aligned with Mars.
Filed under:
-
@LaoC said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@jinpa said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
Sounds like another good reason not to get vaccinated. They can't euthanize you if you're not vaccinated.
Checkmate, governazis!
Legal advice courtesy ofThere's always a bit of twisted irony with that kind of troll. What I said is actually true. Your response was designed to protect your views on the matter which cannot survive accurate understanding.
But I do understand that some folks are under duress. I am grateful, though, that some of us are not.
-
@jinpa the views that it’s about a facility for people seeking to end their life on their own free will, whereas you heavily imply it’s forced and you found an oh so clever loophole?
-
@topspin While euthanasia is voluntary, there have been news of people being pushed towards euthanasia in other places it's been legalized in. The most damning reports so far have come from Canada, where it has been testified to their parliament (IIRC) that a person was kept days without food to pressure him to sign off on his own death.
That's a potential problem anywhere euthanasia is introduced; whoever is paying the bills for old people's healthcare is looking at tremendous savings from a few of them kicking the bucket a little early. But I digress.
I don't imagine it bothers the old people facing their last shot that they need to get another shot first. Them having to wait for a week for the vaccine to take effect, on the other hand, prolongs whatever suffering drove them to suicide in the first place. And since the vaccine has to be administered by a nurse (and people looking for euthanasia rarely move about on their own, so there are extra people involved in said moving) there's unvaccinated contact in any case.
-
@jinpa said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
What I said is actually true.
Maybe explain what point you were trying to make. This is about assistance to people electing to end their own life (=suicide). Now, one might consider it slightly amusing that one needs to get vaccinated to do so, but given that the process likely involves meeting quite a few professionals and staff ... well, it leads to other discussions that we've already had here.
It's in Germany, where the government can't officially 'suicide you' (there's no death penalty, and apparently that is in the constitution). (If they were to unofficially suicide you, they probably wouldn't care that much about breaking the rules for vaccination. That would probably be the least illegal thing about the whole operation.)
Edit:
@acrow said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:While euthanasia is voluntary, there have been news of people being pushed towards euthanasia in other places it's been legalized in. The most damning reports so far have come from Canada, where it has been testified to their parliament (IIRC) that a person was kept days without food to pressure him to sign off on his own death.
If they can manipulate people into volunteering for euthanasia, they can probably manipulate the same into getting a vaccination.
-
@acrow your post reads like it’s simultaneously arguing that, yes, this is about people plotting to murder you and that having to get vaccinated before getting the assisted suicide treatment is intentionally making people suffer.
So, in total it’s a wash?
-
@cvi said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@acrow said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
While euthanasia is voluntary, there have been news of people being pushed towards euthanasia in other places it's been legalized in. The most damning reports so far have come from Canada, where it has been testified to their parliament (IIRC) that a person was kept days without food to pressure him to sign off on his own death.
If they can manipulate people into volunteering for euthanasia, they can probably manipulate the same into getting a vaccination.
Maybe. Maybe not. If someone needs that much convincing, they probably value their life. And if they value their life, they usually don't want any extra problems in it. And if they didn't believe that the vaccine brings a considerable risk of said problems in the form of permanent side-effects, they'd have taken it already.
-
@topspin said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@acrow your post reads like it’s simultaneously arguing that, yes, this is about people plotting to murder you and that having to get vaccinated before getting the assisted suicide treatment is intentionally making people suffer.
So, in total it’s a wash?
Euthanasia tends to be accepted and promoted by the government for it's economics, yes. But does the government wish to prolong the patients' suffering? Not likely intentionally, no. After all, they'll have to pay to keep the patient alive for that much longer.
-
@acrow said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
While euthanasia is voluntary, there have been news of people being pushed towards euthanasia in other places it's been legalized in.
The best policy statement I've ever seen on the topic in the UK stated that while it would remain illegal, when it was clear that it was the free will of the person concerned and they weren't pressured into it, there would be no prosecution, and that this would always be determined on a case by case basis. This was something like 20 years ago (the person who made the statement as chief prosecutor is now the leader of the opposition party) but I don't think it's likely to have changed.
Some things are really subtle in law; making them too rigid can lead to abuse by leaving it over-clear how far people can go up to the line when we'd rather they went nowhere near it.
-
@dkf said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
Some things are really subtle in law; making them too rigid can lead to abuse by leaving it over-clear how far people can go up to the line when we'd rather they went nowhere near it.
Unfortunately, this is a thing that never works in practice. (You'll note, for example, that this was Ben Lubar's argument.) Ultimately, laws (or regulations or whatever) need to be written in such a way that it is immediately clear what conduct is criminalized and what conduct is not criminalized. People have the right to demand that from their government.
The actual way to discourage coercied physician assisted suicide is to foster a culture where all suicide is unthinkable. Some of that is advanced care and specialized help for the suicidal. But another part of that has to be making non-coercied physician assisted suicide illegal.
The kind of coercion we're trying to prevent doesn't even need to come from the government? What if it's the family trying to get the patriarch to off themselves in order to get the inheritance money? How are you ever going to police that?
-
@GuyWhoKilledBear said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
How are you ever going to police that?
Yeah, but making suicide illegal isn't going to fix that either. As you say - how are you ever going to police that?
Making suicide a punishable offense is at best useless (as the saying goes, you only catch the failures), and at worst counter-productive (instead of helping the failure cases where something good may come out of the help, you're now pursuing them legally).
-
@cvi said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@GuyWhoKilledBear said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
How are you ever going to police that?
Yeah, but making suicide illegal isn't going to fix that either. As you say - how are you ever going to police that?
Making suicide a punishable offense is at best useless (as the saying goes, you only catch the failures), and at worst counter-productive (instead of helping the failure cases where something good may come out of the help, you're now pursuing them legally).
Well for one thing:
: I hear you find you guilty of attempted suicide. I sentence you to being committed to a mental hospital where you can get the help you need. But for the other thing, I wasn't talking about "punishing" people who ar trying to commit suicide. I was talking about punishing doctors who help others commit suicide. Presumably, if we made that illegal, most of the doctors who do it now would stop.
And if we withdraw the societal imprimatur that says that suicide is OK because physician assisted suicide is OK, presumably fewer people will attempt to commit suicide I'm the first place.
-
@GuyWhoKilledBear said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@cvi said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@GuyWhoKilledBear said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
How are you ever going to police that?
Yeah, but making suicide illegal isn't going to fix that either. As you say - how are you ever going to police that?
Making suicide a punishable offense is at best useless (as the saying goes, you only catch the failures), and at worst counter-productive (instead of helping the failure cases where something good may come out of the help, you're now pursuing them legally).
Well for one thing:
: I hear you find you guilty of attempted suicide. I sentence you to being committed to a mental hospital where you can get the help you need. But for the other thing, I wasn't talking about "punishing" people who ar trying to commit suicide. I was talking about punishing doctors who help others commit suicide. Presumably, if we made that illegal, most of the doctors who do it now would stop.
And if we withdraw the societal imprimatur that says that suicide is OK because physician assisted suicide is OK, presumably fewer people will attempt to commit suicide I'm the first place.
I know that the reverse (making it socially acceptable will increase the number of suicides) of this has been used as an argument against allowing assisted suicide in the countries where it has been proposed. I don't ever recall seeing a study that proved those fears correct (though it is not knowledge that I seek out). So I am not sure how much of an impact it will really have.
-
@GuyWhoKilledBear said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
Well for one thing:
: I hear you find you guilty of attempted suicide. I sentence you to being committed to a mental hospital where you can get the help you need. Except there's always the temptation to send them into the standard prison system, especially if that's run on a for-profit basis with the judge's spouse being a key investor.
But really, it's all morally simple:
- Coerced = bad to allow. Coercing someone into killing themselves or into seeking to be killed by someone else is clearly tantamount to murder.
- Uncoerced = bad to prohibit. If someone is in a lot of pain from an incurable disease that gradually takes away their ability to move, and needs help to end their by-now-miserable existence, is it moral to deny it?
We can wish the situation wasn't like that in the first place. We can wish for fairies to take away everyone's incurable pain too, and to make it so that nobody ever feels like they would profit from the death of another. Might as well, it'll have about the same effect.
Every case in this area is difficult.
-
@GuyWhoKilledBear assisted suicide used to be illegal here for a long enough time (so much for the crazy “government wants to kill you” argument).
In fact, only passively assisted dying is legally allowed (the article talked about “Germany” but was about Switzerland). People have fought long legal battles for their right to die. If someone’s life is just endless untreatable pain, who are you to decide how long they have to suffer?
The idea that people commit suicide because “physician assisted suicide is ok” is both factually wrong and farcical.
-
@GuyWhoKilledBear said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
Well for one thing:
: I hear you find you guilty of attempted suicide. I sentence you to being committed to a mental hospital where you can get the help you need. Aside from what @dkf said. How do you imagine that looks in practice? There probably needs to be some sort of process .. so, there's hearings, lawyers, the whole spiel. That verdict may come down weeks/months/years down the line. What do you do in meantime? (Is the verdict even useful if it comes with a long delay?)
-
@dkf said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@GuyWhoKilledBear said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
Well for one thing:
: I hear you find you guilty of attempted suicide. I sentence you to being committed to a mental hospital where you can get the help you need. Except there's always the temptation to send them into the standard prison system, especially if that's run on a for-profit basis with the judge's spouse being a key investor.
How do laws work where you live?
Here, they specify a punishment for breaking them, so that if the law says that the penalty for "assisted suicide" is being committed (temporarily buy mandatorially) to a mental hospital, the judge isn't allowed to switch it to sending them to a real prison.
Nobody treats this as a real crime. It's just a handwavey patch to get people who need help into mental hospitals so they can get help. But in order for the cops to be able to try to stop you from doing X, you first have to make X illegal.
- Uncoerced = bad to prohibit. If someone is in a lot of pain from an incurable disease that gradually takes away their ability to move, and needs help to end their by-now-miserable existence, is it moral to deny it?
Yes, absolutely. Thou shalt not kill and all that. Lots of things are painful, and not all of them are incurable. If we let "He's in enough pain that it would be better if he were dead," is enough of an excuse, what's the justification for witholding suicide assistance from someone with permanent painful but non-fatal injuries?
What about someone whose permanent pain is guilt and shame? Imagine the guy who molested and murdered a heap of little girls, then got caught and is serving a well deserved life sentence in prison. (There's no death penalty in his jurisdiction.) Then in prison, he Gets Religion and what he did was wrong and harmful to others and shameful to himself. There's no forgiveness for what he did and his conditions aren't going to get any better. Ever.
The prison guard sees this asshole tying his bedsheet into a noose. Should the prison guard intervene?
-
@cvi said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@GuyWhoKilledBear said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
Well for one thing:
: I hear you find you guilty of attempted suicide. I sentence you to being committed to a mental hospital where you can get the help you need. Aside from what @dkf said. How do you imagine that looks in practice?
How it looks is that the person gets involuntarily committed to a mental hospital by a judge, just like I said.
It's a handwavey hack so that people who aren't actually suicidal can challenge the "detention" in a Due Process-y way and the cops, who can only intervene if you're breaking the law, can intervene because you're breaking the law.
You get sent to the mental hospital semi-immediately because you're too dangerous (to yourself) to let out on bail. (Apparently most of the time, people who are stopped in the middle of a suicide attempt actually want help once they're removed from the situation, so if they're actually suicidal and want to get sent for mental help, they won't be challenging the no bail decision.) Once the hospital does its work and you're not longer actively suicidal, they sentence you to time served and everyone moves on with their lives.
-
@GuyWhoKilledBear and then they can’t get a job anymore because they got a criminal record. Hilarious.
Don’t forget that there’s still countries who do criminalize attempted suicide. And of course, in the Christian dark ages, when they ruled, things were just as terrible in that regard (like in every other regard).
-
@topspin said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
Don’t forget that there’s still countries who do criminalize attempted suicide. And of course, in the Christian dark ages, when they ruled, things were just as terrible in that regard (like in every other regard).
Wait, when were the "Christian dark ages" again?
The only "the Dark Ages" I'm familiar with are the period between the fall of the Roman Empire and the start of the Renaissance.
Is that the comparison? Because that was 600 years ago. Is that supposed to teach us about physician assisted suicide in the 21st century?
-
@GuyWhoKilledBear no, only about the Christian morals you keep bringing up.
The 21st century was already covered by:
- talk about “German” euthanasia clinics that aren’t in Germany
- insane drivel that the government is going to murder you unless you conveniently refuse covid vaccination
- people committing suicide on a whim because they saw that “physician assisted suicide is ok”
-
@GuyWhoKilledBear said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
tying his noose into a bedsheet.
-
@HardwareGeek Derp. Fixed.
-
@GuyWhoKilledBear said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
you're too dangerous (to yourself) to let out on bail.
Unless you're in a jurisdiction that has implemented left-wing bail "reform", in which case you could have been witnessed running down Main Street with a machete, whacking off the heads of everyone you pass, and you'll still be out on $0 bail in half an hour. (Ok, maybe that a little bit of hyperbole, but there are people who have been arrested literally dozens of times for crimes they committed while already out on bail for previous crimes, and they still get released immediately with $0 bail. Even people with warrants for previously jumping bail get released for $0.) I don't think "dangerous to yourself" is even a consideration.
-
@topspin said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@GuyWhoKilledBear no, only about the Christian morals you keep bringing up.
Huh?
What does the phrase "the Christian dark ages" refer to? What time period is that? I've never heard that before. I can probably guess at the specific moral practice that you're upset about if you tell me what the phrase means. (Alternatively, you could just tell me.)
- people committing suicide on a whim because they saw that “physician assisted suicide is ok”
The other two bullets on this list are even more not what I said than this bullet. Someone else said them. I didn't say this either, but my guess is that you think I did.
My point is that there's all kinds of things that We As A Society should do to keep people who we don't want to commit suicide from killing themselves.
In order to do that, we need to decide who We As A Society actually don't want to kill themselves. Call them Group 1. The inverse of that group, the people who We As A Society don't care one way or the other if they kill themselves, can be Group 2.
To make the math easier, say there's a Group 3 who We As A Society are hoping that they commit suicide. We'd be monsters if we had anybody in Group 3, right? That would be terrible. Group 3 is an empty set.
My proposed rule is that everybody is in Group 1 and nobody is in Group 2 or Group 3.
The benefit of that is that nobody who's actually in Group 1 can accidentally think they're in Group 2 or 3. We As A Society would rather not have you commit suicide, regardless of who you actually are.
No, you aren't too sick that we'd rather pull the plug and save the money.
No, you aren't in too much debt.
No your sins aren't unforgivable, whatever they are.
No, your situation isn't so hopeless that suicide is the correct answer.No shit, my morality is influenced very heavily by my faith. But are you telling me that atheists don't think that suicide is bad?
That doesn't match with what I've heard in the past.
-
@HardwareGeek said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@GuyWhoKilledBear said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
you're too dangerous (to yourself) to let out on bail.
Unless you're in a jurisdiction that has implemented left-wing bail "reform", in which case you could have been witnessed running down Main Street with a machete, whacking off the heads of everyone you pass, and you'll still be out on $0 bail in half an hour. (Ok, maybe that a little bit of hyperbole, but there are people who have been arrested literally dozens of times for crimes they committed while already out on bail for previous crimes, and they still get released immediately with $0 bail. Even people with warrants for previously jumping bail get released for $0.) I don't think "dangerous to yourself" is even a consideration.
The whole point is that this is what being involuntarily committed to a mental hospital actually is.
-
@GuyWhoKilledBear said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
involuntarily committed to a mental hospital
But that's not progressive. Many of the problems our cities have today is (at least partially) the result of giving people who need mental health care their "freedom" to walk away from that care.
-
@HardwareGeek said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@GuyWhoKilledBear said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
tying his noose into a bedsheet.
Well, how else was he supposed to get some sleep?
-
@HardwareGeek said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@GuyWhoKilledBear said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
involuntarily committed to a mental hospital
But that's not progressive. Many of the problems our cities have today is (at least partially) the result of giving people who need mental health care their "freedom" to walk away from that care.
I'm trying to stay away from that because this isn't actually a Garage topic.
-
@GuyWhoKilledBear said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@HardwareGeek said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@GuyWhoKilledBear said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
involuntarily committed to a mental hospital
But that's not progressive. Many of the problems our cities have today is (at least partially) the result of giving people who need mental health care their "freedom" to walk away from that care.
I'm trying to stay away from that because this isn't actually a Garage topic.
Really though? Because I think we have crossed that line at roughly light speed when we seriously considered that the they’re out to murder you unless you refuse to take a covid vaccine.
-
@topspin said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
Because I think we have crossed that line at roughly light speed when we seriously considered that the they’re out to murder you unless you refuse to take a covid vaccine.
What?
-
@boomzilla said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@topspin said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
Because I think we have crossed that line at roughly light speed when we seriously considered that the they’re out to murder you unless you refuse to take a covid vaccine.
What?
Um??
@jinpa said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
Sounds like another good reason not to get vaccinated. They can't euthanize you if you're not vaccinated.
And:
@jinpa said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@LaoC said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@jinpa said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
Sounds like another good reason not to get vaccinated. They can't euthanize you if you're not vaccinated.
Checkmate, governazis!
Legal advice courtesy ofThere's always a bit of twisted irony with that kind of troll. What I said is actually true. Your response was designed to protect your views on the matter which cannot survive accurate understanding.
But I do understand that some folks are under duress. I am grateful, though, that some of us are not.
-
@topspin said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@GuyWhoKilledBear said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@HardwareGeek said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@GuyWhoKilledBear said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
involuntarily committed to a mental hospital
But that's not progressive. Many of the problems our cities have today is (at least partially) the result of giving people who need mental health care their "freedom" to walk away from that care.
I'm trying to stay away from that because this isn't actually a Garage topic.
Really though? Because I think we have crossed that line at roughly light speed when we seriously considered that the they’re out to murder you unless you refuse to take a covid vaccine.
I don't think "we" did seriously consider that. When @jinpa said that, he was obviously kidding.
To the extent that this topic isn't a Garage topic (both sides treat it as if it is at times), that's not a joke I would make in a non-Garage topic. But I'm only responsible for my posts.
@HardwareGeek is a a good guy. We chat in the Garage all the time, so I feel like I know where he's going with the comments about too few people with mental health issues are involuntary committed. I feel like continuing that conversation would put me on the wrong side of the Garage/non-Garage line, and I'm choosing not to step over it.
-
@topspin said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@boomzilla said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@topspin said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
Because I think we have crossed that line at roughly light speed when we seriously considered that the they’re out to murder you unless you refuse to take a covid vaccine.
What?
Um??
@jinpa said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
Sounds like another good reason not to get vaccinated. They can't euthanize you if you're not vaccinated.
And:
@jinpa said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@LaoC said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@jinpa said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
Sounds like another good reason not to get vaccinated. They can't euthanize you if you're not vaccinated.
Checkmate, governazis!
Legal advice courtesy ofThere's always a bit of twisted irony with that kind of troll. What I said is actually true. Your response was designed to protect your views on the matter which cannot survive accurate understanding.
But I do understand that some folks are under duress. I am grateful, though, that some of us are not.
OK, I can accept your comment as hyperbole.
Or if you were being serious you're confusing, "This thing can be abused," with "You will be targeted for abuse."
-
@GuyWhoKilledBear said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
continuing that conversation would put me on the wrong side of the Garage/non-Garage line
I agree. I think I got too close to it, and maybe crossed it, myself.
-
@jinpa said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@LaoC said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@jinpa said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
Sounds like another good reason not to get vaccinated. They can't euthanize you if you're not vaccinated.
Checkmate, governazis!
Legal advice courtesy ofThere's always a bit of twisted irony with that kind of troll. What I said is actually true. Your response was designed to protect your views on the matter which cannot survive accurate understanding.
But I do understand that some folks are under duress. I am grateful, though, that some of us are not.
-
@topspin said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
If someone’s life is just endless untreatable pain, who are you to decide how long they have to suffer?
...Aaaand we get back to the point about government skimping on morphine. Terminal care patients in pain should have free access to all the drugs they could want. If they were given that, the demand for assisted suicide would go down several notches.
There was a study. Most people campaigning for euthanasia don't actually want to terminate anyone viable so much as they want competent terminal care.
-
@acrow said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
Most people campaigning for euthanasia don't actually want to terminate anyone viable so much as they want competent terminal care.
Terminal care is one thing. But if the diagnosis is that I'm going to lose my mind (e.g. severe dementia, to the point of being unable to communicate / function / recognize people around me), I'd give ending it serious thought. If I'm destined to 'forget' who I have been my whole life, what's the point? That's a death right by itself.
Fortunately, that topic seems to be relatively far off, and (fortunately again) if relatives are any indication, it might not be an issue ever.
-
@cvi said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
If I'm destined to 'forget' who I have been my whole life, what's the point?
Unless you like meeting new people all the time...
As I get older, it is something that worries me a little...
-
@cvi said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
Fortunately, that topic seems to be relatively far off...
Threads are free.
OK, seriously this time:
Most people campaigning for euthanasia don't actually want to terminate anyone viable so much as they want competent terminal care.
Terminal care is one thing. But if the diagnosis is that I'm going to lose my mind (e.g. severe dementia, to the point of being unable to communicate / function / recognize people around me), I'd give ending it serious thought. If I'm destined to 'forget' who I have been my whole life, what's the point? That's a death right by itself.
By a certain analogy, that is a death. But in another very real way, it's a disability and not a death.
In a society ordered a certain way, your family would love you enough that they'd want you to be around and want to make sure you were taken care of, even if you couldn't reciprocate. The Catholic rules about this that I am being accused of trying to stretch into a Catholic Theocratic Dystopia are designed to encourage that kind of a society.
The Secular Theocratic Dystopia rules in places that that have physician assisted suicide laws are, in practice if potentially not by design, encouraging the opposite.
I don't think that there's a neutral setting for this. At a certain point, A Society has to either choose to zig or to zag.
And that's leaving out the fact that that's the first step down a slippery slope towards killing other people with a disability. The mentally retarded. People with Down syndrome. Etc.
-
@GuyWhoKilledBear it’s funny there’s so much rambling about “muh free choice” when it’s about such a heavy burden as wearing a mask. When it’s actually about your own life a decision like “I can’t eat or move anymore, I can barely breathe, there’s still too much blood in my morphine-stream to not feel constant pain, this is not worth living”, then it’s not possible this is a free choice you’re allowed to make. No, it’s obviously the society forcing this on you.
You even want to punish attempted suicide.The Secular Theocratic Dystopia rules in places that that have physician assisted suicide laws are, in practice if potentially not by design, encouraging the opposite.
So we’re back to “they’re out to murder you”.
Nice oxymoron there, by the way.The Catholic rules about this that I am being accused of trying to stretch into a Catholic Theocratic Dystopia
It’s a consequence of your own rules.
@Arantor cannot mention how labor laws work in the EU without you concluding that he definitely, absolutely wants to force this on everybody else on the planet, no matter if he actually is anywhere close to thinking that. So, in corollary, anytime you bring up your Christian rules without context (i.e. 100% of the time), the conclusion is that you want to force these rules on everybody else.
That may not be what you want, or anybody else for that matter, but it’s how it works under your rules. You made your bed.
-
@topspin said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@GuyWhoKilledBear it’s funny there’s so much rambling about “muh free choice” when it’s about such a heavy burden as wearing a mask. When it’s actually about your own life a decision like “I can’t eat or move anymore, I can barely breathe, there’s still too much blood in my morphine-stream to not feel constant pain, this is not worth living”, then it’s not possible this is a free choice you’re allowed to make. No, it’s obviously the society forcing this on you.
I mean...I agree these are two ridiculous things to put together, but I think for different reasons that you seem to be saying.
Personally, my problem with assisted suicide is, as has been brought up, the massive potential for abuse. I'm not sure where the line should be on all that, but I'm sympathetic to both sides of the pro / con debate.
-
@topspin said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@GuyWhoKilledBear it’s funny there’s so much rambling about “muh free choice” when it’s about such a heavy burden as wearing a mask. When it’s actually about your own life a decision like “I can’t eat or move anymore, I can barely breathe, there’s still too much blood in my morphine-stream to not feel constant pain, this is not worth living”, then it’s not possible this is a free choice you’re allowed to make. No, it’s obviously the society forcing this on you.
For one thing, forcing and coercion are too strong a word for the kind of pressure that society usually provides for the "default" choice that society encourages in terms of most choice. For example, in most of the West, society encourages the children of middle class and rich people to go to college. I wouldn't call that force or coercion, but there is some pressure there. Maybe that pressure is good or maybe that pressure is bad, but there's not nothing there, right?
That's the kind of pressure that assisted suicide regimes provide.
Yes. You got me, though. I'd like to replace this with explicit pressure against suicide. Including of the physician assisted variety.
I'm proposing passing a law to make something illegal and provide actual punishments for the doctors who facilitate it. Yes. Like all laws, this is an example of government force and coercion. I'm also OK with the laws that make murder and robberies illegal in your jurisdiction providing for force and coercion to discourage murders and robberies. The law that demands that you pay your taxes forces and coerces you into paying your taxes. That doesn't make it bad.
Existing laws that allow for physician assisted suicide are a lesser degree of pressure than force or coercion, but my new proposed laws consist of force and coercion. I'm OK with that.
The difference between making physician assisted suicide illegal and making masks mandatory is that mask mandates didn't work. Making physician assisted suicide illegal will make it so that fewer people die of suicide, but making "masks" mandatory will not make it so that fewer people die of COVID.
In practice, the masks are a totem used to signal your fealty to the Secular Theocratic Dystopia. We could pass a law that says that all men have to carry Rosary beads in their pocket at all times to signal their fealty to the Catholic church. That would do as much to dispel COVID as the mask mandates did. But the government still ordered us to wear masks, which had the effect of separating the Good People who wore masks from the Bad People who did not.
You even want to punish attempted suicide.
The thing I want to do is
punishment, not actual punishment. I want them to get treated for the mental illness that they obviously have.The Catholic rules about this that I am being accused of trying to stretch into a Catholic Theocratic Dystopia
It’s a consequence of your own rules.
@Arantor cannot mention how labor laws work in the EU without you concluding that he definitely, absolutely wants to force this on everybody else on the planet, no matter if he actually is anywhere close to thinking that. So, in corollary, anytime you bring up your Christian rules without context (i.e. 100% of the time), the conclusion is that you want to force these rules on everybody else.
That may not be what you want, or anybody else for that matter, but it’s how it works under your rules. You made your bed.
No, I'm definitely proposing that you change your laws to make physician assisted suicide illegal in exactly the same way @Arantor was proposing that the US change its labor laws to bring them in line with the EU. And then I'm also proposing using the existence of a law that makes suicide illegal to convince potential suicide victims not to commit suicide.
My beef is that there's a big enough non-Catholic constituency for banning physician assisted suicide that you can't say that any legal regime that bans physician assisted suicide is a Catholic dystopia just because I personally am proposing it.
Am I proposing A Dystopia Where We All Just Do What GuyWhoKilledBear Thinks Is A Good Idea, And Rule Number One Is That Boston Is Illegal? That's a fair way to hyperbolize my point. But that's not the same thing as a Catholic Theocratic Dystopia.
Put it another way. Certain people deserve to be executed by The State. Murderers who Very Obviously Did It, for example. My position is that not even these people should be executed by The State, even though, by definition, they deserve it. I am opposed to the death penalty in nearly all cases. I consider "How likely is this guy to repeal the death penalty?" as a positive attribute when I consider who to vote for.
Yes, Catholic teaching strongly influences my feeling on the death penalty, just like it strongly influences my feeling on lots of things. But is every jurisdiction that bans the death penalty a Catholic Theocratic Dystopia?
I think I recall you saying that you're opposed to the death penalty. Are you an advocate for a Catholic Theocratic Dystopia?
-
I'm starting to sense a pattern here...
-
@GuyWhoKilledBear said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@topspin said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@GuyWhoKilledBear it’s funny there’s so much rambling about “muh free choice” when it’s about such a heavy burden as wearing a mask. When it’s actually about your own life a decision like “I can’t eat or move anymore, I can barely breathe, there’s still too much blood in my morphine-stream to not feel constant pain, this is not worth living”, then it’s not possible this is a free choice you’re allowed to make. No, it’s obviously the society forcing this on you.
Yes. You got me, though. I'd like to replace this with explicit pressure against suicide. Including of the physician assisted variety.
You forgot to address the point above. So the person who has nothing but constant suffering left is not allowed to make that choice, because you decide that's not right for him?
The thing I want to do is
punishment, not actual punishment.That's just making it illegal by any other name (except you didn't actually change the name).
This still means you will be tried for it, will have to get legal defense etc. Will probbaly make the person try to commit suicide again just to get out of that.I think I recall you saying that you're opposed to the death penalty. Are you an advocate for a Catholic Theocratic Dystopia?
No, but you mention your Christian views for everything, and thus by @GuyWhoKilledBear's doctrine mentioning it means wanting to force the whole world into it. (Which by the way makes it political and every time you mention your Christian views it automatically belongs in the garage.) Them's the rules.
-
@topspin said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@GuyWhoKilledBear said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@topspin said in Tales from Coronavee-rooss Italy, mamma mia!:
@GuyWhoKilledBear it’s funny there’s so much rambling about “muh free choice” when it’s about such a heavy burden as wearing a mask. When it’s actually about your own life a decision like “I can’t eat or move anymore, I can barely breathe, there’s still too much blood in my morphine-stream to not feel constant pain, this is not worth living”, then it’s not possible this is a free choice you’re allowed to make. No, it’s obviously the society forcing this on you.
Yes. You got me, though. I'd like to replace this with explicit pressure against suicide. Including of the physician assisted variety.
You forgot to address the point above. So the person who has nothing but constant suffering left is not allowed to make that choice, because you decide that's not right for him?
The idea that the life you're describing constitutes "nothing but constant suffering" is but one opinion.
Yes, I disagree, and I am OK with my tax money being used to fund anti-suicide programs, which necessarily include soft coercion away from suicide. (My version of the program also includes hard coercion.)
Is there anyone else, other than those suffering from dementia, who you think their life consists of constant suffering enough that government anti-suicide programs are inappropriate? Are anti-suicide programs ever appropriate?
The thing I want to do is
punishment, not actual punishment.That's just making it illegal by any other name (except you didn't actually change the name).
This still means you will be tried for it, will have to get legal defense etc. Will probbaly make the person try to commit suicide again just to get out of that.The conceit behind it is that the person whose suicide attempt was interrupted usually wants to get help. By sentencing them to do it in a place that is, in one sense, a jail, the taxpayers are paying for it even if patient can't. They're not going to be challenging their detention just so they can jump off a bridge.
Do they have involuntary commitment for mentally ill people where you live? All this is is that.
I think I recall you saying that you're opposed to the death penalty. Are you an advocate for a Catholic Theocratic Dystopia?
No, but you mention your Christian views for everything, and thus by @GuyWhoKilledBear's doctrine mentioning it means wanting to force the whole world into it.
Yes, I want to force the whole world to adopt the law I'm proposing. That's why I'm proposing it. Yes, I am a Christian and talk about how I am a Christian a bunch. That doesn't automatically make the law I'm proposing a Christian law. Your opposition to the death penalty doesn't make a ban on capital punishment an atheist law either. That's all I meant.
(Which by the way makes it political and every time you mention your Christian views it automatically belongs in the garage.) Them's the rules.
This is sort of fair. Every time I mention my Christian views as justification for a law, it's a Garage post. I would have never opened like this, But you guys were already "weapons free" and discussing politics for like half a day by the time I got here. (Also, this topic in particular is treated like a Garage topic by all sides on a routine basis.)
The initial joke about "You shouldn't get the vaccine because then they can't physician assisted suicide you?" I would never have made that post in this topic.
-
Can someone Jeff that debate to the Garage? (yeah I know,
and all that, but please?)
