Post by Deleted on Mar 31, 2018 0:42:44 GMT
tpfkar
Mar 30, 2018 0:25:43 GMT @miccee said:
No, the religious are ones who believe in some kind of greater meaning for humanity's existence. Such as something that would justify withholding access to end of life drugs for those who have expressed an unambiguous wish to be helped to end their unbearable suffering. And I have never advocated for setting up clinics to "sexually cannibalize and gut" anybody. There's nothing at all ethically problematic about something that, even by your own estimations, can have no conceivable negative repercussions for the person receiving the treatment (at their own request). My views are the antithesis of what it means to be religious, because religion is by definition what people use to aggrandise life and humanity's role in the universe. By definition, the view that people shouldn't be assisted to die must be the religious one, because it's impossible to imagine how assisting someone to die (at their request) could have a bad outcome for the person being assisted to die (at their request). Any kind of argument against this assistance would need to invoke something like a greater meaning to life which transcends an individual's own experience of suffering and their rights to their own body. There's nothing "vicious" about helping someone to do something that they have unambiguously stated that they want, and for which they will never experience any unforeseen negative consequences. I don't want this law to exist for the sake of the people who would assist others to die, and it would only be for those who have gone out of their way to seek this type of assistance, therefore by defintion that is not predatory.
Pray for the AI Christ that will save you. 
And good to know you ultimately decided against the "cannibalizing and gut clinics". I had no idea you were considering such, I only knew you were good with your fellow psychopaths having their go if they could get the poor mentally ill to assent. But, 
And I know you're up for whatever fellow predators can get the mentally ill to agree to.
And dream of sterilizing all women. And mass murdering everybody. And among many many lunacies, that you're not harming someone if they don't ever see what destroyed them. The very definition of both predatory and pure pathological wackdoodle. 
Moreover, it may be possible to spray a chemical in the world's air, or add something to the water supply that would prevent women from becoming pregnant. It wouldn't be necessary to ban sex. Alternatively, we could develop an AI that would peacefully and swiftly wipe out all sentient organisms on Earth, perhaps by releasing some kind of toxin into the air.
There is no coherent argument to be made for saying that it's in the best interests of someone who wants to die to be prevented from doing so in a swift and painless way. The person who dies by that means will never have any future interests which will supercede the ones that they were invested in at the time of requesting assistance to die.