Assisted dying back on the table.

[ippy]

The last time this came up wasn't it something like 82% were for some form of assisted dying?

I don't know but I doubt the figures have altered very much?

Regards ippy

[Nearly Sane]

The last time this came up wasn't it something like 82% were for some form of assisted dying?

I don't know but I doubt the figures have altered very much?

Regards ippy

Big shout out to the argumentum ad populum!

[jakswan]

Big shout out to the argumentum ad populum!

Bingo!

Actually didn't see an argument in Ippy's post just stated a fact.

A fallacy of a fallacy.

[ippy]

Bingo!

Actually didn't see an argument in Ippy's post just stated a fact.

A fallacy of a fallacy.

Am I being told that the percentage of those here in the U K are for some sort of assisted dying that I have posted was wrong?

If there's some form of assisted dying put to the vote in parliament, I'm sure that this is how happens, a vote is taken so unless I'm mistaken the decision is taken based on which side of the argument has the majority of votes?

Regards ippy

[Nearly Sane]

Bingo!

Actually didn't see an argument in Ippy's post just stated a fact.

A fallacy of a fallacy.

You might be right but then not sure what the point being made is.

[Nearly Sane]

Am I being told that the percentage of those here in the U K are for some sort of assisted dying that I have posted was wrong?

If there's some form of assisted dying put to the vote in parliament, I'm sure that this is how happens, a vote is taken so unless I'm mistaken the decision is taken based on which side of the argument has the majority of votes?

Regards ippy

No, that isn't the ad populum, see link below. The question is what relevance you think the figure has to whether that makes it a correct decision.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum

[SteveH]

Big shout out to the argumentum ad populum!

No, because it's a matter of public policy, not of objective fact.

[Nearly Sane]

No, because it's a matter of public policy, not of objective fact.

Doesn't need to be if the argument is that something is right because of the numbers supporting it.

[SteveH]

Doesn't need to be if the argument is that something is right because of the numbers supporting it.

But he didn't actually say that it was right; he just quoted the figures.

[Nearly Sane]

But he didn't actually say that it was right; he just quoted the figures.

In which case as already covered in reply to jakswan, I fail to see the point. It might be that he isn't using it this way but it's a valid reading so we await ippy to explain.

[Enki]

So you would pay tax to have people ''cough cough'' then and have everybody paying for it?
I'm afraid if you are pro assisted dying you cannot avoid these questions Sane.
What type of people are you going to attract?
What happens to those who refuse?
Are firms going to take measures to maximise their business?
Are relatives going to force people to do it?
Is being a burden on people going to hustle people into doing it?
Are miserable people going to be allowed it?

It seems to work in Oregon, where assisted dying has been enshrined in law since 1997.

https://www.dignityindying.org.uk/assisted-dying/international-examples/assisted-dying-oregon/

[ippy]

In which case as already covered in reply to jakswan, I fail to see the point. It might be that he isn't using it this way but it's a valid reading so we await ippy to explain.

I sometimes wonder about you N S, I've seen you having similar trouble with other posters on the forum I can't remember who or when it's not important enough, I and I think most of us on the forum don't seem to need such a degree of accuracy applied to every other word or sentence as it seems you do, I'm not about to meet you half way, so if you don't like the way I present myself there are alternatives.

I wish you well N S, but can't be arsed with things that are petty to me, please try to find someone else that might be bothering you.

Regards ippy 

[Nearly Sane]

I sometimes wonder about you N S, I've seen you having similar trouble with other posters on the forum I can't remember who or when it's not important enough, I and I think most of us on the forum don't seem to need such a degree of accuracy applied to every other word or sentence as it seems you do, I'm not about to meet you half way, so if you don't like the way I present myself there are alternatives.

I wish you well N S, but can't be arsed with things that are petty to me, please try to find someone else that might be bothering you.

Regards ippy

You take more words to refuse to clarify something than anyone else I have ever seen.

[Robbie]

Yet he's right, NS. You're not the only one, there is at least one other who does the same. In the end there's so much wrangling over phrasing, the original topic is obscured. There are threads on this forum that have gone on endlessly getting nowhere just because of that. What's more you don't let go. Anyone would think you expressed yourself perfectly at all times - no-one does.

I understood Ippy's meaning & imagine others did too.

[Nearly Sane]

Yet he's right, NS. You're not the only one, there is at least one other who does the same. In the end there's so much wrangling over phrasing, the original topic is obscured. There are threads on this forum that have gone on endlessly getting nowhere just because of that. What's more you don't let go. Anyone would think you expressed yourself perfectly at all times - no-one does.

I understood Ippy's meaning & imagine others did too.

Have I said that I express myself perfectly at all times? Since you know what ippy means - do you want to say what that is, given he isn't interested in doing so?

[jakswan]

You might be right but then not sure what the point being made is.

I read it as an observation. Do you talk like this in life....

Person: would you like a drink green tea is popular?
You: fallacy
Person: what
You: explain why it's a fallacy
Person: asleep

[Nearly Sane]

I read it as an observation. Do you talk like this in life....

Person: would you like a drink green tea is popular?
You: fallacy
Person: what
You: explain why it's a fallacy
Person: asleep

Diddums

[SteveH]

I believe in euthanasia or assisted suicide (they're not the same thing) for people who ask for it while compos mentis, and who are dying anyway, but if it was me, I'd prefer it to be administered while I was in bed, bot on a table.

[ippy]

I believe in euthanasia or assisted suicide (they're not the same thing) for people who ask for it while compos mentis, and who are dying anyway, but if it was me, I'd prefer it to be administered while I was in bed, bot on a table.

I'm all for personal choice such as the Oregon example, I've not heard anything particularly negative about it, no doubt they get the odd few religious nuts complaining about it but even then I've not heard of anything from the religious side directed toward the Oregon model.

When I refer to the Oregon example I'm meaning when practised in the whole of the way it is written into the Oregon's statutes of law, (For those with limited comprehension skills). 

Regards ippy

[jeremyp]

I find it odd that people who believe they are going to heaven, are often the ones who are desperate to stay down here as long as possible.

That's not entirely fair. They are desperate for everybody else to stay down here (or perhaps up here) as long as possible. They want to impose their own values and beliefs on everybody else, for no good reason.

[jeremyp]

Am I being told that the percentage of those here in the U K are for some sort of assisted dying that I have posted was wrong?

The point is that just because 82% of people are in favour of assisted dying doesn't mean it is a good idea.

Personally, I am in favour of the idea. If I want to die because my quality of life is very poor, who are you to try to stop me? If I want to die and somebody else is prepared to help me, why should they be prosecuted for murder?

However, I think there need to be very strong safeguards and by that I mean judicial safeguards. I think assisted dying should be allowed only if the person who wants to die has sworn to it under oath in a judicial setting e.g. in front of a judge.

[Rhiannon]

The point is that just because 82% of people are in favour of assisted dying doesn't mean it is a good idea.

Personally, I am in favour of the idea. If I want to die because my quality of life is very poor, who are you to try to stop me? If I want to die and somebody else is prepared to help me, why should they be prosecuted for murder?

However, I think there need to be very strong safeguards and by that I mean judicial safeguards. I think assisted dying should be allowed only if the person who wants to die has sworn to it under oath in a judicial setting e.g. in front of a judge.

Would legal aid be available? Because if not, many of those in the direst need won’t be able to access the service.

[ippy]

The point is that just because 82% of people are in favour of assisted dying doesn't mean it is a good idea.

Personally, I am in favour of the idea. If I want to die because my quality of life is very poor, who are you to try to stop me? If I want to die and somebody else is prepared to help me, why should they be prosecuted for murder?

However, I think there need to be very strong safeguards and by that I mean judicial safeguards. I think assisted dying should be allowed only if the person who wants to die has sworn to it under oath in a judicial setting e.g. in front of a judge.

J P,you say: 'The point is that just because 82% of people are in favour of assisted dying doesn't mean it is a good idea'.

This post of yours seems to be directed at me as though I was saying something more than stating a well known fact about the percentages in favour of assisted dying here in the U K?

Regards ippy

[jeremyp]

Would legal aid be available?

Absolutely.

Because if not, many of those in the direst need won’t be able to access the service.

Here is the tricky thing. The service would probably be self financing.

I know that, if I were to be in the position of wanting to end my life it would be because of circumstances in which the future would involve lots of medical treatment and care all of which would be expensive. This is why the checks and safeguards have to be judicial in nature, because the government might be all for it on the grounds of NHS savings.

[jeremyp]

This post of yours seems to be directed at me as though I was saying something more than stating a well known fact

Regards ippy

Well your post could be read as an attempt to argue that assisted dying should be allowed because most people are in favour of it.

You can protest that you didn't mean it that way, but it looks like Nearly Sane also came up with that interpretation.