Re: Thought You'd Like to Know

In article <h61l3j$t3l$4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Micha Berger <micha@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
sheldonlg <sheldonlg@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I think this is an issue for case-by-case analysis. Not that we
shouldn't in principle be interested in things people do to themselves,
but comparing the impact to society of illegalizing, regulating, and
open market availability of each substance.

This appears to be your current statement, to which I would agree -- for
many drugs. But that's now off topic.

Glad we agree -- for the most part. I still feel that if someone wants
to commit suicide, we should try to talk him out of it, but in the end
it is his business.

Whereas I would argue that we have nothing to lose by stopping him.
Unlike the effects of illegalizing drugs.

On the contrary, we have much to lose by stopping him.

It is the start of totalitarianism, and many decisions
made by "society" are vastly wrong. Once one starts, one
is on the road to a totalitarian government, especially
if it is claimed to be in the interest of the person
restricted by the forbidden action.

OTOH, even assisted suicide of a suffering person cheapens life in the
standards of the resulting culture. It's in all of our best interest to
keep death as unthinkable of a choice as possible.

I disagree. We are going to have to face the fact of
overpopulation. The first commandment in Breishith
tells us to FILL haaretz, not to overpopulate it.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
.

Loading