I'm not surprised anymore, but care to elaborate?
What's your moral framework anyway?
I'm not surprised anymore, but care to elaborate?
A person should not live for the sake of others ... but shouldn't cause inconvenience to others either. When faced with the choice, I think you should always shoulder your own burdens. That's also a part of individualism.
True, in the case of many suicides though, that means people who aren't trained for it/aren't expecting it. Often it means family members. There's a difference between someone dying in a retirement home and hanging yourself to be found by your kin.
If you are a burden to someone alive, it is up to the other person to deal with that. Either he shoulders it or cuts you off, that is his decision. Also, I don't want to be burdened with other people's crap simply because their burden is net bigger than my inconvenience.
True, but this is not the purpose of suicide prevention. Suicide prevention is about trying to get people to see options to live for themselves and be happy with their lives, not to guilt them into suffering for the sake of others. That video has a really myopic view of both what drives people to consider suicide and what drives suicide prevention strategies.
I don't see it as "edgy" or "myopic". It's from the position of pessimism/negative utilitarianism/consequentialism.PeacefulAnarchy wrote: ↑May 20th, 2020, 6:45 pmTrue, but this is not the purpose of suicide prevention. Suicide prevention is about trying to get people to see options to live for themselves and be happy with their lives, not to guilt them into suffering for the sake of others. That video has a really myopic view of both what drives people to consider suicide and what drives suicide prevention strategies.
I'm not denying people with those views exist there are many of them, but they are not, for the most part, the people actually doing the hard work of counselling suicidal people.
I also want to add that weak and myopic arguments like those in that video are exactly those used by anti suicide freedom advocates. They love to paint those who want assisted suicide to be legal as bloodthirsty or indifferent to death and as fundamentally anti-life, as opposed to the reality that most people who support legal assisted suicide, like myself, are people who recognize the complexity of life situations and that while suicidal people need counseling to make sure they consider all their options and the gravity of the possible decision that they also have a right to determine, ultimately, what's best for them. For the vast majority of suicidal people suicide is not the best option for them, but to deny that for a small percentage of people it is, is as foolish as that video which pretends to argue edgily that actually suicide is good.
But who decides which are weak? Another person will think otherwise. You can discuss any argument or provide cons.
This must be where the rating system and the discussion on each thesis comes in.Kublai Khan wrote: ↑June 19th, 2020, 3:25 am
- sourceFalling fertility rates mean nearly every country could have shrinking populations by the end of the century.
And 23 nations - including Spain and Japan - are expected to see their populations halve by 2100.
As a result, the researchers expect the number of people on the planet to peak at 9.7 billion around 2064, before falling down to 8.8 billion by the end of the century.
They'll need it
Thanks for voicing your opinion. Will make sure to steer clear.
It seems so, so I have. I'm guessing the maker of the OP and meds have such abilities. It also didn't seem to affect our current votes, but I took a snapshot just in case. When I added vaccines responses to our Covid poll, it toasted the prior results. Not sure if there was a better way to do that. Still learning with polls.
Billions of animals must be farmed and killed to feed our populations.
OldAle1 wrote:I think four Aamir Khan films is enough for me. Unless I'm down to one film left on the IMDb Top 250 at some point and he's in that last film, at which point I'll watch it and then shoot myself having become the official-check-whoring person I hate.
PeacefulAnarchy wrote:Active topics is the devil. Please use the forums and subforums as intended and peruse all the topics nicely sorted by topic, not just the currently popular ones displayed in a jumbled mess.
maxwelldeux wrote:If you asked me to kill my wife and pets OR watch Minions, I'd check the runtime and inquire about sobriety requirements before providing an answer.
Torgo wrote:Lammetje is some kind of hybrid Anna-Kendrick-lamb-entity to me and I find that very cool.
monty wrote:If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen. iCM ain't for sissies.
mightysparks wrote:ARGH. RARGH. RARGH. DIE.
Kowry wrote:Thanks, Art Garfunky.
I haven't seen the video yet, but this is one of the points that efilists make (which also creates a debate point on whether it'll be better without humans or humans should actually stay to help other species in some capacity or it's not ethical to create new humans for such a task and we should only try to influence those already born).
Well that's about the most common number of likes then (views divided by 10)