assisted suicide is wrong

ok my opponent, i will acknowledge that you are not making an assumtion of your winning. It was more along the lines of a statement of fact. However i will dis-miss it, because i just realized i really don't care. in the end its the voters decision anyway. PLEA FOR HELP " You argue that we should solve the problem by pumping them full of anti-depressants, and forcing them to live out their tortured life of pain, both physically and emotionally." I would like to ask you how i am stating this in 'nicer' terms exactly? My whole argument on this, was basically telling you that they can be helped from emotional pain. You obvously don't seem to get that by going ahead and saying they are suffering 'emotional pain'. So how about i explain it terms you will more understand? 89% of the folks who were planning AS and were refused it, did not even end up wanting to commit it in the future 35 years. Thats more than enough of a mojority in this case, to use emotional pain of life as an argument. And you also make predictions about the patients life. You are absolutely dead-set on the idea that this patients life is going to be horrible. This is not taking into account that the patient may have friends, or family, or other loved ones. With that, you can not prove that this persons life will be an absolute wreck from then til the day he dies. MY OPPONENT- "But again, why should we force them to live out their life, if they don't want to? I can't force you to live, just like you can't force me to change my life. But in arguing against AS, you do such a thing." You seem to have over-looked my whole big paragraph about the selfishness issue. Either that or you have misundertood it, which i am assuming is what happened. With the statement above, you are confirming exactly what all suicide people think, therefor expanding this debate to not just those in hospital beds. i advise you to re-read my 'selfishness' paragrapgh. GOOD DOCTORS- MY OPPONENT- "You claim that modern medicine is enough to take care of pain, so AS should not be out of pain.You say that it is not impossible to withstand pain. RESPONSE: What you have failed to address is the fact that pain doesn't always mean physical pain. In fact, it often doesn't mean physical pain, such as the kind you are arguing about. You forget about emotional pain, and the pain you cause yourself and those around you." I find it quite amusing that you would mention this after i basically just told you that emotional pain was a huge factor behind there wanting death. You really contradict yourself here. But it looks as if i will again re-state my meaning in an understandable way to my opponent. You just proved that by saying what you said above, that emotional pain is a reason to give up your life. thus is the same when referring to any depressed teenager who wishes life to end. Obviously this is cure-able as has been proven above with my PLEA FOR HELP paragraph. IN RESPONSE TO YOUR STORY- Ok so by giving bills predicament, you are going to assume this is worse case scenario? that his life is totally cursed to be unpleasent for the rest of his days until he should cease to exist? And if so you are going to assume that Bills family, friends, and every one else who care about him will do nothing for him. Let me better explain this with a real story of my own. One of the employees for our painting business, was recently injured in a car accident. He has lost both his legs. And on top of that his wife leaves him and takes his tow children. He is now left alone by himself, without legs and children and his wife. For a long period of time, he assumed death would be the best solution for this situation. However, over time, He realizes that he does not have to give up his life over this incident. He realizes he can get back up and do something to better his life and his predicament. He gets re-married and re-gains custody of his children. He is now just as fit in his life as you or i. He could have easily given up or discounted all hope. But he had family and loved ones there to give him support all the way through. SELFISHNESS- "You are making the assumption that this is what people go through. Your argument is based upon an assumption, so we can't assume it to be true. Provide some facts, and maybe this argument will fly." Ok so i am 'assuming' that disregaurding the thoughts and feelings of others is selfish? How do my arguments 'not fly'? Putting youself in front of others is indeed slefish. The point i was trying to make was that, the patient and the doctor seem to disregard the family all together. I am sure the family would be very pressed into emotional turmoil with the death of the patient. Thus, selfishness. I don't know where the idea is forming that i am making 'assumptions' or what that has to do in relevance to anything i have said at all... FINANCIAL PAIN- This argument really bugs me. You are suggesting that a family should let this individual die, just because it costs alot of money? I find this very sick and indeed very wrong. If this is the case with any family than i am sure there is a problem. EMOTIONAL PAIN- My opponent seems to think that the world at end is the only way for the individual. Of course the family does not want to see the patients death. And they indeed don't have to, as i have been trying to prove throughout this debate. REPONSE TO VALUE OF LIFE- My opponent here starts out explaining but quickly changes the subject. My opponent says he can let this argument drop as long as he has one example of it being justified. He still has yet to do so. i also find it interesting that he would stray from this subject, which draws me to two conclusions. 1.He knows what i am saying is true and does not want to put himself on this argument 2. He simply lacks the will or motivation to do so. MY EXAMPLES- 1."The drug addict. Well first off, this example isn't about AS. Its about drugs. If this were a debate on drugs, then maybe this example would apply" Dear opponent, again you misundertood me. This example was simply an anology to your 'its my life' philosophy. Meaning in this situation, that the druggy, like the patient, decided it was his own life to do with what he wishes. In both cases they harm others due to their own selfishs insights. the patients, being the hurting of loved ones in order to make his self 'comfortable'. 2.the second one was just for emphasis to my first. MURDER- MY OPPONENT-"So this argument is about doctors playing God. But you have failed to realize the full implications of my argument. The doctor isn't playing God" playing god is choosing who lives or dies by your own accord. Your defintion is not so relevant, to anything he would do. and just because the doctor consents with the patient, does not prove him in anyway justified. Im goingto need a little more than that my friend. LAST PARAGAPH- MY OPPONENT- "Let me ask you this. Have you ever been paralyzed from the neck down, in constant pain, and unable to do anything purposeful with your life other than grunt meaninglessly? You obviously have not, since you are being incredibly insensitive to the patients suffering. I don't mean to insult you, but all of your arguments are superficial, based upon the premise that pain is a physical manifestation, can be taken care of by huge doses of medicine, and we should force those people to live." Again, are you to impose that from this point on life in now completely useless? it is this state of mind that causes people to want to do AS even more. Are world tends to look on the more negative aspect of every situation. i apply my above arguments here. Sorry guys but i am just about out of remaining characters unfortunately. Which bites Because i have alot more to say. However it looks as if i will have to hold my arguments off for the moment. I would like to ask my opponent that this debate does not conclude our friendship out-