"My Body, My Choice!": Should it Extend to Suicide?

[Ostroeuropa]

Person A tells me if I don't convert to his religion, he will be sad because he believes his religion is the only truth. I don't convert to his religion, knowing he will be sad. I have intentionally caused pain to another person. Is it immoral?

That isn't close to being as devastating as losing someone to suicide.

How do you feel about Incels?

The feelings of the family members are not sufficient reason to prevent someone exercising bodily autonomy. The person is not responsible for their feelings.

[Al Mumtahanah]

Presuming God is libertarian which He isn't in any religion that I know of.

Maybe not the "True" religion but they exist.
That and it depends on what you mean by libertarian in this case.
In this argument God does judge and punish suicidal people but only gives himself the authority to do so.
To clarify to everyone else if not you; I'm playing devil's advocate here.

That's nice, I reject that as a legal principle as it necessarily presumes Islam is false.

[Jean-Paul Sartre]

Person A tells me if I don't convert to his religion, he will be sad because he believes his religion is the only truth. I don't convert to his religion, knowing he will be sad. I have intentionally caused pain to another person. Is it immoral?

That isn't close to being as devastating as losing someone to suicide.

As someone who’s been on both sides, that’s bullshit.

[The New California Republic]

Know what, since today I don't feel like getting into an argument with somebody on the internet on whether suicide is a right or choice or not. And since we clearly aren't going to come on any common ground for this discussion I'm just going to end it right here. Thank you for making me doubt somethings and I'm just going to head back to Forum 7 or to develop one of my puppet nations. So good day.

My, they are dropping like flies today.

[Uiiop]

That's sounds like advice given for oneself and not what do with other people.

It's what is right for everyone.

I'm not denying its painful, I'm saying just because the choice you make over your body is 'painful' for those around you doesn't change the fact that you own and possess your body and yourself, not other people, not your family or your friends.

It's immoral to intentionally cause pain to another person. Suicide isn't different.

Just because you can view an action as wrong doesn't mean you don't want people to be free to do that action.

[Al Mumtahanah]

Also no one who has a heart would say it's wrong to stop someone from sending themselves to hell. That's callousness, not tolerance.

[Geneviev]

It's immoral to intentionally cause pain to another person. Suicide isn't different.

Forcing someone with extreme depression to not be able to end it is intentionally causing them pain. And yet, you're okay with that.

They should also get help for their depression.

That isn't close to being as devastating as losing someone to suicide.

Your argument was "it's immoral to intentionally cause pain to another person". I'm pointing out an example where that's clearly not true.

It's also not intentional in that example, and it's not really that painful.

That isn't close to being as devastating as losing someone to suicide.

Yet, if you believe in god, wouldn't you be happy for them considering that they have moved on from the shackles of this miserable world and into a better place?

That's what the Bible says, but it's still hard in reality.

[Nakena]

Know what, since today I don't feel like getting into an argument with somebody on the internet on whether suicide is a right or choice or not. And since we clearly aren't going to come on any common ground for this discussion I'm just going to end it right here. Thank you for making me doubt somethings and I'm just going to head back to Forum 7 or to develop one of my puppet nations. So good day.

My, they are dropping like flies today.

At least some know better things to do.

[Paddy O Fernature]

Also no one who has a heart would say it's wrong to stop someone from sending themselves to hell. That's callousness, not tolerance.

Hell outside man's creation here on earth doesn't exist.

[Cekoviu]

Forcing someone with extreme depression to not be able to end it is intentionally causing them pain. And yet, you're okay with that.

They should also get help for their depression.

That doesn't fucking work, often. It's not even possible for many, because a large number of people don't get the luxury of having free healthcare.

[Jean-Paul Sartre]

Also no one who has a heart would say it's wrong to stop someone from sending themselves to hell. That's callousness, not tolerance.

If your god sends depressed people to Hell, he is not great, and it’s a severe delusion to believe in him.

[Uiiop]

Maybe not the "True" religion but they exist.
That and it depends on what you mean by libertarian in this case.
In this argument God does judge and punish suicidal people but only gives himself the authority to do so.
To clarify to everyone else if not you; I'm playing devil's advocate here.

That's nice, I reject that as a legal principle as it necessarily presumes Islam is false.

That's fair i'd guess. But it does kinda put the kibosh on the whole "Inherently atheistic" angle.

[Geneviev]

They should also get help for their depression.

That doesn't fucking work, often. It's not even possible for many, because a large number of people don't get the luxury of having free healthcare.

That should be changed.

[Purgatio]

Forcing someone with extreme depression to not be able to end it is intentionally causing them pain. And yet, you're okay with that.

They should also get help for their depression.

Your argument was "it's immoral to intentionally cause pain to another person". I'm pointing out an example where that's clearly not true.

It's also not intentional in that example, and it's not really that painful.

Yet, if you believe in god, wouldn't you be happy for them considering that they have moved on from the shackles of this miserable world and into a better place?

That's what the Bible says, but it's still hard in reality.

Actually not, to "intend" something (according to the UK House of Lords judgment of R v. Woollin) can include doing X knowing it is virtually certain that Y would result. If I keep driving my car at top speed, knowing it is virtually certain I'm going to run down a person in front of me, I intend to run him down if I keep driving my car at top speed.

Likewise, if I know that not converting to Christianity/Islam/Buddhism will cause pain to some devout adherents of those religions, then I intend to cause them pain. If I know that being gay will cause pain to some homophobic people, then by continuing to be gay, I intend to cause them pain.

Fact is, you are allowed to do what you want with your own body, even if your personal choices make other people unhappy. "Sad feelings" doesn't give you a claim or ownership over another's body and person.

[Cekoviu]

That doesn't fucking work, often. It's not even possible for many, because a large number of people don't get the luxury of having free healthcare.

That should be changed.

I agree, but it's not going to be, and in the meantime we can't just keep preventing suicidal people from exercising bodily autonomy.

[Geneviev]

They should also get help for their depression.


It's also not intentional in that example, and it's not really that painful.


That's what the Bible says, but it's still hard in reality.

Actually not, to "intend" something (according to the UK House of Lords judgment of R v. Woollin) can include doing X knowing it is virtually certain that Y would result. If I keep driving my car at top speed, knowing it is virtually certain I'm going to run down a person in front of me, I intend to run him down if I keep driving my car at top speed.

Likewise, if I know that not converting to Christianity/Islam/Buddhism will cause pain to some devout adherents of those religions, then I intend to cause them pain. If I know that being gay will cause pain to some homophobic people, then by continuing to be gay, I intend to cause them pain.

Fact is, you are allowed to do what you want with your own body, even if your personal choices make other people unhappy. "Sad feelings" doesn't give you a claim or ownership over another's body and person.

People shouldn't be encouraged to do things that are certain to harm people. That does include suicide.

[N7eternia]

You are allowed to harm others in the choices you make over your own body that doesn't invade the bodily sovereignty of others. Some parents will be sad if their kids get piercings or tattoos. This isn't a justification to ban piercings and tattoos.

If parents lose their child to suicide, that is much more painful to them than if that child has a piercing or tattoo. Losing a friend to suicide is also just as painful and it's much worse than what you seem to think.

I lost my friend to suicide. I would have done as much as I could in my power to make him stay, but he made his choice. It did and does affect me, but yet for me, that was his decision and I accept it. Shortly after, in the fresh grief stricken state, and mistakenly being active in social media at the time, I vocalized this. I had people tell me that what he did was wrong and that I was also wrong for thinking the way I do.

[Jean-Paul Sartre]

Actually not, to "intend" something (according to the UK House of Lords judgment of R v. Woollin) can include doing X knowing it is virtually certain that Y would result. If I keep driving my car at top speed, knowing it is virtually certain I'm going to run down a person in front of me, I intend to run him down if I keep driving my car at top speed.

Likewise, if I know that not converting to Christianity/Islam/Buddhism will cause pain to some devout adherents of those religions, then I intend to cause them pain. If I know that being gay will cause pain to some homophobic people, then by continuing to be gay, I intend to cause them pain.

Fact is, you are allowed to do what you want with your own body, even if your personal choices make other people unhappy. "Sad feelings" doesn't give you a claim or ownership over another's body and person.

People shouldn't be encouraged to do things that are certain to harm people. That does include suicide.

Offense is taken, not given.

[Paddy O Fernature]

That doesn't fucking work, often. It's not even possible for many, because a large number of people don't get the luxury of having free healthcare.

That should be changed.

No, it shouldn't.

[Al Mumtahanah]

Also no one who has a heart would say it's wrong to stop someone from sending themselves to hell. That's callousness, not tolerance.

If your god sends depressed people to Hell, he is not great, and it’s a severe delusion to believe in him.

He doesn't consider depression justification to kill people.

[Paddy O Fernature]

If your god sends depressed people to Hell, he is not great, and it’s a severe delusion to believe in him.

He doesn't consider depression justification to kill people.

Being Homosexual or a non believer however.....

[Geneviev]

People shouldn't be encouraged to do things that are certain to harm people. That does include suicide.

Offense is taken, not given.

What do you mean?

[Purgatio]

Actually not, to "intend" something (according to the UK House of Lords judgment of R v. Woollin) can include doing X knowing it is virtually certain that Y would result. If I keep driving my car at top speed, knowing it is virtually certain I'm going to run down a person in front of me, I intend to run him down if I keep driving my car at top speed.

Likewise, if I know that not converting to Christianity/Islam/Buddhism will cause pain to some devout adherents of those religions, then I intend to cause them pain. If I know that being gay will cause pain to some homophobic people, then by continuing to be gay, I intend to cause them pain.

Fact is, you are allowed to do what you want with your own body, even if your personal choices make other people unhappy. "Sad feelings" doesn't give you a claim or ownership over another's body and person.

People shouldn't be encouraged to do things that are certain to harm people. That does include suicide.

Except your definition of "harm" is "any time you make a choice over your own body that makes someone else sad" which, if true, means you are prevented from doing so many things over your own body and over your own life. Whatever choice you make over your body, someone out there is going to be sad. If you have gay sex, someone is sad. If you decide to never get married and have children, someone is sad. If you decide to get tattoos or piercings, someone is sad. Whatever you do with your body, you have the potential to make someone out there sad. But "hurt feelings" is not an argument that you can wield to stop someone else from making a personal choice over their life and body.

[Jean-Paul Sartre]

If your god sends depressed people to Hell, he is not great, and it’s a severe delusion to believe in him.

He doesn't consider depression justification to kill people.

Yet it seems he does. He’s either not omnipotent or not good if he creates depressed people who will eventually commit suicide. allah is a moral monster. Do better than him.

[Cekoviu]

Offense is taken, not given.

What do you mean?

That it's their choice to be harmed, I guess? Sartre's approaching it from a very wrong angle.