Patient #48273

What kind of depraved shit do you think "aloe" is code for?

I don't think exercise alone will fix your particular variety of mental illness.

I saw that in the other thread. Pretty creepy, Jan.

These two shouldn't be allowed to read each other's posts. They're fueling each other's paranoia.

This was the most blatant O'Reilly rip-off that I can remember. Kate's Law was an O'Reilly favourite too though.

Not to split hairs again, but the spectrum of liberalism certainly includes the centre-right.

I was just saying that there are sick people (physically and/or mentally ill) who aren't terminally ill, but are still suffering greatly, potentially more than some terminally ill people are, but physician-assisted suicide is only legal in Canada when the patient is terminally ill. I think physician-assisted suicide should be about relieving long-term suffering, whether or not that suffering is likely to result in death any time soon.

I actually don't think it should only be for terminally ill people. There are plently of very sick people who suffer indefinitely with no hope for a cure or even improvement. It's easier to justify with terminally ill people, but they're not necessarily suffering more. It's a very tricky subject.

I kind of have mixed feelings about whether or not mentally ill people should have access to physician-assisted suicide* the same way some physically ill people do. On the one hand, a suicidal person's mind is not functioning properly and their decision-making capacity is impaired, so theoretically they're not capable of making a sound decision. However, there comes a point where mental suffering is so extreme and has been going on for such a long time that it seems cruel to not offer them the same options given to terminally ill people (in some countries/states). I think ideally the standard for allowing physician-assisted suicide would be much higher for mentally ill people, but it should be an option in some cases. They'd have had to exhaust all reasonable treatment options and the suffering would have to have been very long-term. *I tend not to use the term "euthanasia" because, to me, it connotes a lack of agency and I don't support euthanizing people who can't make the decision for themselves. I know that's not how people were using it in this thread though.

I don't like steak either.

Personally, I think it's more contradictory to be pro-life and fiscally conservative. If you want women to stop having abortions, you should want to remove the economic strain that often strongly influences the decision to terminate pregnancy.

I don't think there are many people who'd be deterred by the death penalty, but not a life sentence.

I see where you're coming from, but I still think it's not really a fitting example and a strange choice to use that to back up your argument when there's an abundance of academic literature that states that capital punishment doesn't have a deterrent effect.

It wasn't capital punishment, so it's not a good example. I think we'd all agreed that the justice system- as flawed as it may be- is better at determining guilt than foaming-at-the-mouth racist vigilantes.