the arguments against can only really have their basis in religion
which makes them even more repugnant.
( Vipros. clever got me this far, then tricky got me in, Tue 14 Jun 2011, 14:18, 2 replies, latest was 15 years ago)

It's not repugnant to hold the view or point of argument
only to try and loudly and publicly force it onto someone else.
( the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Tue 14 Jun 2011, 14:19, Reply)

I was thinking more along the lines of actual arguing
rather than it being their argument. If you see what I mean.
( Vipros. clever got me this far, then tricky got me in, Tue 14 Jun 2011, 14:21, Reply)

This isn't true. There are arguments against with regards to protecting people,
however these should be manifested in stricht controls, not an outright ban.
( Naked Ape call me Caitlyn, Tue 14 Jun 2011, 14:20, Reply)

I was being a bit sweeping
morally what someone chooses to do to themselves in that respect is no one's business but their own.
( Vipros. clever got me this far, then tricky got me in, Tue 14 Jun 2011, 14:24, Reply)

What he said ^^^
My dad died of cancer about 10 years ago.

I remember going to visit him once in hospital and he was in severe pain. He told me that if I was given the choice by the doctors to 'bring things to an end' then I was to take it without hesitation. I would have done it myself if I could have, such was his suffering. He lasted for a couple of months after that, but had absolutely no quality of life.

Any rational person who is against the idea has clearly never known anyone in the situation.
(Reverend Fister "a disciplined fuckwit", Tue 14 Jun 2011, 14:24, Reply)