the right to commit suicide is not a RIGHT! - everyone should understand this!

Also, I don't agree with the OP that the suicidal person is giving up their right to life once they try to commit suicide. They do if they succeed, but not before. Afterward, it's a non-issue.
 
so you want to sue the person who saved you? the court will say: if not for the hero, you'll be carried here in a body bag. one can commit suicide when nobody is around to save you. the mission accomplished, you're dead. but as soon as some discovers you, he'll try to save you. from time immemorial, this is a heroic act. why? because savng your life is restoring all rights to life(excluding this non-right to kill oneself). basically you can't call a right to negate all rights a RIGHT. suicide is to negate all rights. thus suicide is not a RIGHT. well, i'm really dissapointed that very few people understand this.

Sounds like you experienced some pain.

I believe that suicide is an individual's choice and between him and God- so thus, a right. I also believe that saving a suicidal victim is also a choice and a right.

Many people are suicidal because of a loss of self worth or loved one, medicines that do crazy things to the mind, etc. My brother has spent the last year keeping a dear friend alive. 911, hospitals, by her side constantly- the whole 9 yards. She is very fragile and would be dead now if not for him. He has done all in his power to help her see her own value and to help her begin to love her life. She may get better, mentally, or she may succeed one day in a suicidal attempt.

Whatever happens, she at least knows that someone cared - my bro knows he did all in his power.
 
I am sorry that it has come to this.

The fact is, for as long as I can remember my motivation for getting up every day has been so that you would not have to bury me. As things have continued to get worse, it has become clear that this alone is not a sufficient reason to carry on. The fact is, I am not getting better, I am not going to get better, and I will most certainly deteriorate further as time goes on. From a logical standpoint, it is better to simply end things quickly and let any repercussions from that play out in the short term than to drag things out into the long term.

You will perhaps be sad for a time, but over time you will forget and begin to carry on. Far better that than to inflict my growing misery upon you for years and decades to come, dragging you down with me. It is because I love you that I can not do this to you. You will come to see that it is a far better thing as one day after another passes during which you do not have to worry about me or even give me a second thought. You will find that your world is better without me in it.

I really have been trying to hang on, for more than a decade now. Each day has been a testament to the extent to which I cared, suffering unspeakable horror as quietly as possible so that you could feel as though I was still here for you. In truth, I was nothing more than a prop, filling space so that my absence would not be noted. In truth, I have already been absent for a long, long time.

My body has become nothing but a cage, a source of pain and constant problems. The illness I have has caused me pain that not even the strongest medicines could dull, and there is no cure. All day, every day a screaming agony in every nerve ending in my body. It is nothing short of torture. My mind is a wasteland, filled with visions of incredible horror, unceasing depression, and crippling anxiety, even with all of the medications the doctors dare give. Simple things that everyone else takes for granted are nearly impossible for me. I can not laugh or cry. I can barely leave the house. I derive no pleasure from any activity. Everything simply comes down to passing time until I can sleep again. Now, to sleep forever seems to be the most merciful thing.

You must not blame yourself. The simple truth is this: During my first deployment, I was made to participate in things, the enormity of which is hard to describe. War crimes, crimes against humanity. Though I did not participate willingly, and made what I thought was my best effort to stop these events, there are some things that a person simply can not come back from. I take some pride in that, actually, as to move on in life after being part of such a thing would be the mark of a sociopath in my mind. These things go far beyond what most are even aware of.

To force me to do these things and then participate in the ensuing coverup is more than any government has the right to demand. Then, the same government has turned around and abandoned me. They offer no help, and actively block the pursuit of gaining outside help via their corrupt agents at the DEA. Any blame rests with them.

Beyond that, there are the host of physical illnesses that have struck me down again and again, for which they also offer no help. There might be some progress by now if they had not spent nearly twenty years denying the illness that I and so many others were exposed to. Further complicating matters is the repeated and severe brain injuries to which I was subjected, which they also seem to be expending no effort into understanding. What is known is that each of these should have been cause enough for immediate medical attention, which was not rendered.

Lastly, the DEA enters the picture again as they have now managed to create such a culture of fear in the medical community that doctors are too scared to even take the necessary steps to control the symptoms. All under the guise of a completely manufactured “overprescribing epidemic,” which stands in stark relief to all of the legitimate research, which shows the opposite to be true. Perhaps, with the right medication at the right doses, I could have bought a couple of decent years, but even that is too much to ask from a regime built upon the idea that suffering is noble and relief is just for the weak.

However, when the challenges facing a person are already so great that all but the weakest would give up, these extra factors are enough to push a person over the edge.

Is it any wonder then that the latest figures show 22 veterans killing themselves each day? That is more veterans than children killed at Sandy Hook, every single day. Where are the huge policy initiatives? Why isn’t the president standing with those families at the state of the union? Perhaps because we were not killed by a single lunatic, but rather by his own system of dehumanization, neglect, and indifference.

It leaves us to where all we have to look forward to is constant pain, misery, poverty, and dishonor. I assure you that, when the numbers do finally drop, it will merely be because those who were pushed the farthest are all already dead.

And for what? Bush’s religious lunacy? Cheney’s ever growing fortune and that of his corporate friends? Is this what we destroy lives for

Since then, I have tried everything to fill the void. I tried to move into a position of greater power and influence to try and right some of the wrongs. I deployed again, where I put a huge emphasis on saving lives. The fact of the matter, though, is that any new lives saved do not replace those who were murdered. It is an exercise in futility.

Then, I pursued replacing destruction with creation. For a time this provided a distraction, but it could not last. The fact is that any kind of ordinary life is an insult to those who died at my hand. How can I possibly go around like everyone else while the widows and orphans I created continue to struggle? If they could see me sitting here in suburbia, in my comfortable home working on some music project they would be outraged, and rightfully so.

I thought perhaps I could make some headway with this film project, maybe even directly appealing to those I had wronged and exposing a greater truth, but that is also now being taken away from me. I fear that, just as with everything else that requires the involvement of people who can not understand by virtue of never having been there, it is going to fall apart as careers get in the way.

The last thought that has occurred to me is one of some kind of final mission. It is true that I have found that I am capable of finding some kind of reprieve by doing things that are worthwhile on the scale of life and death. While it is a nice thought to consider doing some good with my skills, experience, and killer instinct, the truth is that it isn’t realistic. First, there are the logistics of financing and equipping my own operation, then there is the near certainty of a grisly death, international incidents, and being branded a terrorist in the media that would follow. What is really stopping me, though, is that I simply am too sick to be effective in the field anymore. That, too, has been taken from me.

Thus, I am left with basically nothing. Too trapped in a war to be at peace, too damaged to be at war. Abandoned by those who would take the easy route, and a liability to those who stick it out—and thus deserve better. So you see, not only am I better off dead, but the world is better without me in it

This is what brought me to my actual final mission. Not suicide, but a mercy killing. I know how to kill, and I know how to do it so that there is no pain whatsoever. It was quick, and I did not suffer. And above all, now I am free. I feel no more pain. I have no more nightmares or flashbacks or hallucinations. I am no longer constantly depressed or afraid or worried

I am free.

I ask that you be happy for me for that. It is perhaps the best break I could have hoped for. Please accept this and be glad for me.
This goes here, I think. The above is the suicide note left by Daniel Somers, a veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom, among other things.

I support this man's right to head on to the next part of his journey, if there is indeed a next part. He had suffered enough.

Your life is your life. Euthanasia is compassion.
 
Trying to justify accusing someone of damages for prolonging life by using some twisted form of property rights is absolutely ridiculous. Anyone who is so full of themselves that they think the person who prolonged their life deserves to be hunted down and brutally murdered like osan does, is literally insane. There is no other way to put it. You can't reasonably think you have the right to brutally murder someone simply because they extended your life a little longer.
 
Trying to justify accusing someone of damages for prolonging life by using some twisted form of property rights is absolutely ridiculous. Anyone who is so full of themselves that they think the person who prolonged their life deserves to be hunted down and brutally murdered like osan does, is literally insane. There is no other way to put it. You can't reasonably think you have the right to brutally murder someone simply because they extended your life a little longer.

Mind your own business and you won't be minding mine.
 
Mind your own business and you won't be minding mine.

Are you defending brutally murdering someone for saving your life? Minding your own business, to me, means not getting the state involved, and I don't think there should be any laws one way or the other, but how can you seriously accuse someone who saved you of any wrongdoing? Are you that selfish that you think you have no obligation to anyone else to live and then when you are saved try to drag down others by suing them? That is absolutely ridiculous.

I'll concede that they may be assholes for minding your business, but that doesn't justify killing them or taking money from them. Sometimes what you need is an asshole daring enough to dissent.

How important are you that you must be granted your death and granted money if you life. You can't have your cake and eat it, too.
 
Last edited:
rights come with life and end with life. when one commits suicide, one is terminating one's life and terminating his rights to life at the same time! so a hero who comes to save your life is NOT violating your right to commit suicide, a NON-right. rather, he's saving your life, restoring your rights to life at the same time. a saved person cannot go to a court to sue the hero! the court will throw out the case immediately. why? if not for the hero, you'll be a dead body! one has every right to handle one's body to the very point that one's life is not endangered. thus taking drugs and putting on tattoo are valid rights! but suicide is not! thus folks who are for euthanasia should not invoke the right to finish own life as the legit argument. since i can't find a legit reason to rationalize euthanasia without great conflicts of interests, i don't support euthanasia. this is all my essay is trying to say! please focus on my logic. i know you hate my conclusion. trying to prove that taking own life is a valid right first. i'm confident you can't! http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...nt-on-Ron-Paul-s-Pro-Life-and-Anti-Euthanasia

...but what about people with terminal incurable diseases? That disease has essentially interfered with their right to life, so euthanasia is just speeding up the process. Do we have a moral or legal duty to ensure incurable disease research has sufficient funding and these people have access to healthcare?
 
...but what about people with terminal incurable diseases? That disease has essentially interfered with their right to life, so euthanasia is just speeding up the process. Do we have a moral or legal duty to ensure incurable disease research has sufficient funding and these people have access to healthcare?
That's more what I was referring to. Having seen what chemotherapy does, I will not be going through it. Cancer advances will probably be a lot better by that time though.

I'd just rather go out dignified, never changed, and after saying goodbyes to those who loved me. Euthanasia truly is compassionate. I don't care what anyone has to say about the choice I may have to make. I'm in no way suicidal but to prevent needless suffering for months until the ultimate conclusion, let's just say I'd make my own arrangements.

Heartbreaking case I posted a couple months back of the man who was married to his wife something like 60 years. He was originally charged with murder for putting his wife out of her misery. Well truthfully that isn't what happened. He shot her in the head and she lived for another 12 hours or so. A real tragic case as it was clear that was what she wanted, but that the shot didn't kill her instantly. She died later at the hospital. He received two years probation as I recall but had the option of being medically euthanized been available it would have been far less grotesque and painful.

Sad story. With how long they were together I wouldn't be surprised if he passes soon himself if he and his body hasn't already given up.
 
I think you should be allowed to protect somebody from themselves, a lot of times people rethink things after and end up doing fine. If they really want to, they can try again later, nobody is really stopping you unless you get caught in the act. But stopping somebody from killing themselves is not a violent act.

What I don't agree with are laws that criminalize people who try to commit suicide. It should be completely legal.
 
you don't understand my logic. only focus on my conclusion. try to understand my logic first. suicide is to negate all rights(terminate life). thus it is not a right.

Well I like your essay. And your logic seems somewhat sound at first.

But your premise with regard to suicide, even if the stated portion of it is correct, contains a hidden premise that isn't correct: Your logic presumes that one does not ever have the right to choose to give up one's own rights.

I might have the right to remain silent when arrested, but I can still choose to speak if I feel like it.
I might have the right to defend my property, but instead of shooting the thief when I catch him, I might choose to let him run away with the food he stole, and tell him never to come back because next time I might not be in such a good mood.
I might have the right to kick out a tenant who didn't pay their rent, but I might choose to let them stay another month on the promise they will start paying up the arrearages they owe.

I could think of numerous other examples, but I think you get the point. Your logic assumes that I do not have the right to choose whether or not to exercise my rights. But that assumption isn't correct. We are not somehow bound or required to always have to enjoy all our rights.

So the right to life is like any other right. We are free to choose to suspend or end our rights, including our own life, whenever we feel like it.
 
...but what about people with terminal incurable diseases? That disease has essentially interfered with their right to life, so euthanasia is just speeding up the process. Do we have a moral or legal duty to ensure incurable disease research has sufficient funding and these people have access to healthcare?

"Interfered" with their right to life? Are you being serious right now? What kind of verbal gymnastics is that?
 
That's more what I was referring to. Having seen what chemotherapy does, I will not be going through it. Cancer advances will probably be a lot better by that time though.

I'd just rather go out dignified, never changed, and after saying goodbyes to those who loved me. Euthanasia truly is compassionate. I don't care what anyone has to say about the choice I may have to make. I'm in no way suicidal but to prevent needless suffering for months until the ultimate conclusion, let's just say I'd make my own arrangements.

Heartbreaking case I posted a couple months back of the man who was married to his wife something like 60 years. He was originally charged with murder for putting his wife out of her misery. Well truthfully that isn't what happened. He shot her in the head and she lived for another 12 hours or so. A real tragic case as it was clear that was what she wanted, but that the shot didn't kill her instantly. She died later at the hospital. He received two years probation as I recall but had the option of being medically euthanized been available it would have been far less grotesque and painful.

Sad story. With how long they were together I wouldn't be surprised if he passes soon himself if he and his body hasn't already given up.

I wouldn't count on cancer advances being much better. The government controls the medical industry right now, and there's a reason why chemotherapy is the treatment of choice. It's not because it's the most effective, either.
 
I would add the lunacy of state controlled organ donation systems.

It should be painfully clear that you do not own your body because you cannot legally:

1. Rent it (prostitution)
2. Sell it (organs to the highest bidder)
3. End it (suicide)

Ummmm, yes you can? If we're talking about the law as it stands now, then don't even bother discussing it with me. Man's law is ever-changing and arbitrary. You do own your body whether the state says so or not. All 3 options are choices you can make of your own accord.
 
I wouldn't count on cancer advances being much better. The government controls the medical industry right now, and there's a reason why chemotherapy is the treatment of choice. It's not because it's the most effective, either.
Taxol.

Feel happy that the money stolen from you, upwards of 35M, was put into research and development for a drug which is then sold back at 1100% production cost?

Do we get 1% of sales to repay the money given? No. No we do not. That's one drug. There are many, many more.

We fund, they rape. A small part of the reason healthcare is unaffordable and in some senses of the word, collapsing.
 
Ummmm, yes you can? If we're talking about the law as it stands now, then don't even bother discussing it with me. Man's law is ever-changing and arbitrary. You do own your body whether the state says so or not. All 3 options are choices you can make of your own accord.
And the punishments vary.

I believe he is referring to a truly recognized right as to owning your body.

That's like saying you have the right to ingest what you will; They'll just put you in prison for ingesting, this, this, this or this. That is not how freedom works. Either you do, or you don't.
 
you're the only one who understand my logic. but life and death is often one inch apart. the split second one jumps off a building, that person will be dead. so all i'm saying is anyone is free to save him from jumping because this hero is saving his life and restoring his rights right at split second. so there's no before and after at the split second. so the saved one cannot sue the hero. you're the only one person who's gettting what i'm saying! i'm happy! all the folks simply never understood me.
 
PS: if I am serious about suicide, there will be no hero saving me. But freakish thing happen and I promise you this: if I ever tried and you "saved" me, I would hunt you and kill you in the most horrifically and unspeakably gruesome manner imaginable and that is no joke.

That would make you a far worse individual than the person who "saved" you in the first place.

Here's my take:

Anti-suicide laws form the foundation of statism. If the state owns your body to that extent, they can also control what you put in it, from drugs all the way down to fast food. Ultimately, God is the owner of each person, but that's a spiritual claim, not a legal one. Legally, we do indeed all own ourselves. So I oppose any laws against suicide.

On the other hand, I also don't necessarily agree that it is per say wrong to personally intervene in such a desperate situation. If my friend were going to jump off a bridge, I wouldn't support him receiving a criminal punishment, but I'd still try to stop him from doing it.

Ultimately, if you had succeeded, you WOULD be dead. If you want to sue me for saving you, at the very least you should have to kill yourself in order for your heirs to get any money. To not do so is to show that you really didn't want to die anyway, and so removes any real right to complain that I intervened.

I don't think suicide should be illegal, but I also don't believe it is wrong to personally intervene in the moment if you see someone about to do it. Doesn't mean you lock them in psych ward, doesn't mean you put them under surveillance, but to intervene in a situation you personally see happening to save someone's life can't be immoral IMO.
 
Back
Top