13 votes

How libertarian are you? Twin brothers euthanized.

I like to think I'm on the extreme end of the freedom spectrum; say what you want, believe what you want, do what ever you want to your body, etc. With that, I also believe that suicide is perfectly within your rights, and if you need a doctor to help you with that, I guess I just can't get too upset about it.
This article was hard to read, two brothers who were born deaf, are now going blind, so they decided to have their doctor end their lives. I commend Belgium on there regulations regarding this as it seems they are very moral in their laws about allowing suicide among the suffering. But what about the non-suffering? What about those who just want to die? How comfortable are you with the ideas of freedom, that you are willing to take it to this extreme? Do you have the freedom to end your own life? Does that conflict with the ideas of liberty? of your religion? and for the numerous Christians in the liberty movement, how do you reconcile the two issues?
http://news.yahoo.com/deaf-twins-going-blind-euthanized-1655...




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

To Be or Not To Be

Assuming a short 20 years of good health...
After that I expect everything to start breaking down fast.

And hopefully before I get too feeble, give everything to the kids, take a plane trip North, go to sleep on the ice, and let a polar bear have lunch.

But also have a Plan B, if I pop off the planet sooner.

As for the libertarian issue, well, I'm still confused for what a libertarian is.
For me the decision is Free Will.

Uninformed Perhaps?

Before Any action was taken, I would hope they got to learn about people such as Helen Keller. There are some notable blind/deaf people who have gone on to do some amazing things.

I mean if you want to die you want to die, but try not to die in ignorance. People forget about how hectic life was for early man: Gnawing on bones.. women dieing of childbirth at an alarming rate, Running away from giant predators.

I do not mean to be overly critical of there decision.. it is a scary notion living without sight and hearing, but why not try it first before you give up?

This was murder, imho.

Frankly, i dont think this was a "euthanasia" as much as a murder.

The most obvious reason is that there was no obstacle (at least none reported) to these guys killing themselves if they wished. There is no reason they couldnt have been hooked up to a machine and theb push the button to inject the meds. Therefore i see no reason why, other than hooking them up to a suicide machine, anyone else was involved.

The other problem is that counseling wasnt mentioned; perhaps that is just bad reporting but if they recieved none that is very troubling. So now doctors are gonna kill (not help with suicide where the final act is up to the person, mind you, but actually KILL) people who fear the future (which is really all these guys did) without even giving counseling? How do they know the pts werent manipulated? Maybe their parents made them feel a burden already and told them theyd be more so when blind? Were any of their fears even attempted to be dealt with?

A doctor can, in my book, ise euthanasia to end untreatable suffering if the pt wants it. I have no problem with that. But if a person can decide to die and can push a button then the doctor's role should end at hooking uo a machine.
Its the final act that makes the difference. Its like the guy on a ledge threatening to jump...HE has to jump on his own. Pushing him is murder. Until he jumps, he can change his mind and that choice must be his.

I wont even try and justify killing disabled kids if parents "agree". I will simply say this: once the state offers an "alternative" to chronic care, you can bet they will use all their coersive powers to rid themselves of as many disabled people as possible. Im not saying that is the aim of supprters of the bill mentioned, but it that will be the consequence.

As for this being a test of one's libertarian bona fides: state sponsored murder by doctors is definitely an issue but libertarians shoukd be against it.

Put simply: if a person can demand the state kill them, why cant they demand it feed them or do anything else? These guys shoukdve killed themselves with help, not hwve someone else kill them. If they were too scared to push a button, they shouldnt heve died.

I bet suicide is scary.

I think I'd want a doctor to do it rather than do it myself. I can see why they would have wanted it done professionally rather than do it themselves.

Free market capitalism isn't right for America because it works better. It's right because it's free (and it works better).

My problem is with the lack of viable alternatives.

If these people were given REAL counseling first, but still chose suicide that is their affair. But people go through phases in life, and when they are "down" they are given a pill that even if it "works" it will not make them feel loved or valued as a human.

This is the article that got my posting privileges revoked:
http://bklim.newsvine.com/_news/2013/05/12/18212165-dr-stan-...

Thank you fishyculture thecloverhelix, for thinking clearly....

My thoughts, since Christians were specifically asked to respond, is that I do not have the right to end my own life, because I am not my own. More precisely, even if the government permitted it, (and they should) I am not at liberty to as a follower of Christ.

I belong to Christ first, and also to my husband. (and he to me, for that matter) I Corinthians 6:15-7:5

But each one must determine their own position, and I do not presume anything concerning others, even those who attempt suicide. God's grace covered murderers who realized they were doing wrong and chose not to continue that path. The thief on the cross was forgiven last minute, so to speak.

"Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern." ~~C.S. Lewis
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

The real question is the last part of the article...

"Belgian lawmakers are considering a law that would extend euthanasia to dementia patients and children, whose families and doctors consented."

Is that libertarian?

Cuimhnigh orm, a Dhia, le haghaidh maith.

After thinking

If you want to die, its up to you

It Is Cruel That Painless Suicide Is Not Readily Available

It is absolutely a civil liberties issue.

___________________________________________________________________________
"Bipartisan: both parties acting in concert to put both of their hands in your pocket."-Rothbard

I Trust God

I don't think politicians should decide this issue. I also trust that God will forgive them.

Going deaf is far more likely to lead to depression than going blind is, statistically, despite more humans being sight-dominant. I can imagine how depressing it would be to "see it coming," the loss of sight, but I would do everything I could to encourage them to be courageous and stick around--sometimes it takes time to learn how to deal with a new challenge.

We have a right to life, and probably a right to die (which may be moot since it's likely to happen whether we do or not).

What do you think? http://consequeries.com/

While I can understand other commenters' mindset that it is a

Fine line before the individual isn't the one making the decision to end their life, I believe fully in the right to die as a basic human right that was historically afforded to anyone who requested it.

Two comments below, there's an argument against the right to die which uses the point that humans, and thus human life, is just a commodity. I can respect the line of thinking (I did give you an upvote for it, stm) but I think that point can be better used to argue FOR the right to die.

When you're in a position of perpetual suffering, for every person who's a burden on their loved ones, you have another that isn't a burden at all, quite the contrary actually. What comes with perpetual suffering in this country? Monetary benefits.

There's another fine line, and it's between the people who use that money correctly to care for the person as best as can be done and the people who incorrectly care for the person and take as much of that money for themselves as they possibly can. This creates the a situation where life isn't valued for its beauty or its uniqueness, it's valued literally for the dollar amount attached to it. "Let's keep mom alive for as long as possible so we can keep freeloading of her benefits!" This isn't the only way this happens either.

When you're in a position of perpetual suffering, for every person who benefits from treatments, you have another who will never see an end to their suffering within their lifetime. The nastier the ailing condition, the more it costs.

There's yet another fine line, between the doctor who knows there's truly nothing that can be done besides pumping the patient full of big pharma's poisons to try to dull their pain and suffering, and the doctor that knows the longer the patient lives, the more money he's going to make. "Let's keep your mom alive so we keep getting paid for the treatments!" Which side do you really believe the drug companies to be on? Remember, these are same drug companies that are fearful of marijuana because it does what their superchems do without the horrific side effects.

Exploitation of the sanctity of life for financial gain is and always will be a bigger affront to the value of human life than someone who wishes to end their own suffering. There are no two ways about it. By denying someone that, you absolutely must do so while acknowledging that far more often than not, that person's suffering means someone is making money.

I don't buy the association to abortion. The false equivalency begins and ends with the fact that the fetus doesn't get a say in an abortion. The debilitated adult has a voice, listen to it. If you truly believe in the ideals of personal responsibility and personal freedom, you must conclude that one who wants to end their own life due to pain and suffering and has decided this of their own volition should be given this option, and should have a doctor assist them to ensure its done in the safest way possible.

To rob someone of their choice to end their suffering for good because you value their life more than they fear further pain, you might as well be their condition personified.

I'll take the inverse

As to your right to terminate your own life, that is between you and God.

I know ABSOLUTELY that for me to forbid you from or assist you in the taking of your own life MAKES ME GOD, and asserts that I have some sort of purview or ownership over your life. I posit that a "libertarian perspective" would most probably assert this same. So much for ideology.

I'll generally default to stopping a suicide in a moment based on the doctrine of "presumed consent" which might easily include that you basically aren't in your right mind AT THAT MOMENT. This doctrine generally holds where we identify a TREATABLE ILLNESS in the person such as paranoid delusional states which we can in fact treat with medication these days. I've seen some pretty dramatic recoveries and these persons report (and truly look like) they are happy or much happier than when symptomatic.

That can be argued down to the level not of right or wrong but in most cases having done somebody a MAJOR FAVOUR. By which we understand that just being a nice guy isn't always strictly ETHICAL.

Get your preps together! Learn historic food storage and preservation methods and the science that makes them work now, start saving money and the future

Give government authority to issue a license to kill?

Is the doctor a hit man for the government. "Be quick about and decrease the surplus population." ~Scrooge

Mitchell and Webb look.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owI7DOeO_yg

It's the Malthusian Dilemma: How to convince any one that over-population is real but personally doing nothing the solve the alleged problem.

Pragmatic solution, work for government.

Free includes debt-free!

You are the master of your soul.

Your body is controlled by your mind, no matter what anyone says its still an individual decission and nothing else.

sovereign

morality collapsed

Once you stop believing that life is sacred such things as suicide and euthanasia become common place and acceptable, just like abortion is acceptable to many people. Life means nothing. Humans are just another commodity in the marketplace and if 'it' has no purpose then do away with it. People are worthless and "if they would rather die, they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population." It's not really that far a step away from Obama's kill list and drone strikes. And please don't say Obama's kill list/drone strikes have nothing to do with this conversation - we're talking about the value of human life. I don't undestand how anyone can say one life is worth more than another's life. If life is a sacred gift then all life is a sacred gift and if you leave it up to one person to decide if his life or her unborn child's life is not sacred and worthy then Obama's decision that other's lives are unworthy does have merit. I don't see how you can have it both ways.

If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.
James Madison

People are going to do a

People are going to do a cost-benefit on the value of their life vs whatever the other option is.

Examples: trading off fast food, cigarettes, drugs, playing professional football, doing stunts, working in a dangerous field, driving 120mph for the thrill, whatever. It's current enjoyment / higher pay vs. living a longer life.

Euthanasia is just taking this one degree further: a personal belief that they would get more utility from ending their life now than suffering any longer.

I always hold out hope for life.

I don't even let my sick pets get put down. I personally resist euthanasia, suicide, and DNR's.

That said, I firmly believe that no government has any right to prohibit your suicide. If it has that ability, it has the ability to torture you.

To me, these principles are unshakable.

Michael Nystrom's fists can punch through FUD.

I lean towards the idea that

I lean towards the idea that given certain circumstances, it is OK to practice euthanasia. But I don't think I am experienced enough in the world to make an ultimate decision on what I believe in this instance, this is a hard one. If I come up with something I will post my rationale but I do not intend on knowing the right answer today.

No conflict whatsoever. Consistent with NAP.

Your life and body are your private property.

If you wish to enter into a contract with another party to end your own life because you do not have the nerve or wish to avoid unnecessary pain, that is within your right. You are not aggressing against anyone.

If anyone has the ability to stop you from exercising this right they are implying ownership over your property.

I fully recognize the right of the person to do this whether or not he is physically suffering and have no qualms with this logic.

If you want to see a good movie about this topic: "Whose Life is it Anyway"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOJLi6_aBUo

If a state can't secede,

is it truly free?

Yikes! I hate this topic......however,

I have learned that a person who truly wants to end their life on this planet is going to do it no matter what. They are not the ones who tell others about their plans in the hope that they will be stopped or the ones who do just enough to injure themselves to get attention but not die.
I have had several depressing episodes in my own life where I thought that it would be better to be dead than alive. Luckily for me, I managed to ride that wave until I reached the shore and that is where the thoughts ended. Suicide is really a cop-out. I liken it to joining a convent or entering the priesthood. (How nice to not ever have to worry about housing or food or jobs or kids or spouses.)
My mother in law was in the beginning stages of dementia when she died. She was an RN and knew exactly what to expect in her future. I wonder to this day if she did not have connections in the "industry" who helped her to go.
What I am trying to say here is that it should be solely up to the individual. No one should have the right to make that choice for you. If you think that is the way you would want to leave then you should talk to your family before you become incapacitated. We all have to stand before our Maker some day. You can't have a proxy for that. That being said, keeping a person alive on a ventilator or other means instead of letting them die naturally is just plain cruel. It serves no one except the survivors and that is selfish.

~Your perception becomes your reality~

I'm pro life and can say this bad

So if you aren't perfect, you are worthless. This idea that life means nothing is why we have wars for no reason, because life has been made worthless. Who cares if thousands of soldiers die in meaningless war, who cares if 5 babies are murdered every minute by abortion.

Oh and by the way, just about any deaf person can now have transplants so they can hear, and in the not to distant future same with the blind.

should they have been FORCED to stay alive

because others believe in pro life?

As far as who cares about the deaths around the world? odds are those who are in the lives of those who have died, been killed or committed suicide.

It isn't a fun topic but a person should have the right to do with his or her body whatever they please.

I do think evaluations should be done to OFF someone obviously but for TWINS to want to do it together, that seems like a thought out idea and those on the outside odds are don't know what life was like for either or both of them.

Should we FORCE implants on the twins and make them get walking canes as well?

http://shelfsufficient.com - My site on getting my little family prepped for whatever might come our way.

http://growing-elite-marijuana.com - My site on growing marijuana

It's a tough subject

I see it in the same way as I see not receiving the Eucharist.

As a Catholic, I don't agree with your decision and believe you are missing out on an important part of salvation. However, I would never force you to convert to Catholicism--not would I force you to live if you make the decision otherwise for yourself.

I'm in agreement with the poster below,

way below. but what scares me is the last line, "Belgian lawmakers are considering a law that would extend euthanasia to dementia patients and children, whose families and doctors consented."

Nobody should be able to make that decision but the individual. Parents giving consent to euthanize their children? That is crazy talk.

“When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.” – Dresden James

I made the exact same comment on the article

when I read it...only an individual can make this decision for themselves. Then I think about a parent having to even contemplate that sort of thing...how horrible.

I'd rather have a bottle in front o' me than a frontal lobotomy
www.tattoosbypaul.com
www.bijoustudio-atx.com

jrd3820's picture

Interesting Topic

Here goes.

In cases of extreme suffering, I hardly see how it is even a debate.

A few years ago I would have said that people do not/should not have the choice to end their own life (except for cases of suffering, I have always been on board with that), but really it is a choice everyone has whether it is one they even think about anyways.

So, I guess people do have that right. If I want to kill myself, I'll do it. Beyond my friends and family who really has the power to stop me? We can say people SHOULD NOT have the right, but it does not matter because you cannot stop some people who are going to do it anyways. You also cannot put a dead person on trial for doing something they had no right to do.

I consider myself to be a Christian, but I do not spend a lot of time in my life reconciling my thoughts or ideas with Christianity. I go about my life acting out of love and hoping for the best. I know I live my life being kind to others and trying to follow the golden rule. I would never tell a depressed person they should kill themselves because they have that right, and yes, maybe I would even try to intervene. However, at the end of the day I can only take responsibility for myself and my own actions.

Just my very humble opinion on this.

You own yourself...

so you may do with your property as you wish, even to your own detriment.

Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com


"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard

Though

it's not a comfortable subject, if you want to end your life I believe you should have the right. After all, it is YOUR life.

The world is my country, all mankind are my brethren, and to do good is my religion.
-Thomas Paine