Resolved: Self-harm (including suicide) is morally permissible.

Contention 1: Right of Noninterfearance Now if we apply Libertarian thinking here we can observe that we must ensure the Right of Noninterfearnace here in order to confort them as they enjoy harming themselves (which I'll get into later) and we should not stop them from doing things that they enjoy. You can see it's one's own choice on what they want to do with thieir body and theirselves throughout their lives even if it means ending it. Any attempt to intervene and stop or even impead such freedoms and these are important to us and dennying rights would only harm society. (Szasz, T. , 2002, Fatal Freedom: The Ethics and Politics of Suicide, Syracuse: Syracuse University Press. ) The other reason that it is justifiable is that it violates no moral duties and since it does not violate any moral duties it should be acceptable. "Our having a claim right to suicide implies that we also have rights of noninterference and of liberty and is a central worry about physician-assisted suicide. " Pabst Battin (Battin, M. and Mayo, D. (eds. ), 1980, Suicide: The Philosophical Issues. New York: St. Martin's. ) Though the above applies for PAS we can still apply it to this debate. It shows that we have the right to suicide. That these rights are that of noninterference and are a personal liberty that should not be violated. We know that it is widely accepted that we have the right to Life and the Right to Property. With our property, say a computer, we have our right to do with it what we want. Even if it's used, improved, or discarded, we can do with this lab top what we want to it. We own our very bodies and if we apply the theories of that of Materialist Philosophers from the Enlightenment we can see that we are not distint from our bodies and thus we own our bodies. (Kluge, E. W. , 1975, The Practice of Death, New Haven: Yale University Press. ) Theorectically our minds are who we are while the rest of the body is just our property. We can thus do to it what we please. The second part of this area is that of the self-determination of that we have the rights to make decissions connected with that of our well-being. As shown in the "Death with Dignity" movement we can see that suicide and self harm is a natural corollary of the right to life. This is simply because a human does not have the right to end someone else's life, but they can end their own life. (Cholbi, M, 2011, Suicide: The Philosophical Dimensions, Peterborough, Ontario: Broadview) Contention 2: Sucide/self-harm as a Moral Duty. If we observe many views of actutilitarians we can see that these acts actually outweigh their harm. These things can be things like saving other's lives and political protest all fall into this category showing that you may end your life and at the same time you may die for an honnorable cause. (Kupfer, Joseph, 1990, “Suicide: Its Nature and Moral Evaluation”, Journal of Value Inquiry, 24: 67–81. ) When this theory is further examined, the Utilitarians want the maximum amount of happiness out of this and in many instances does that not only mean that it is morally permissible, but morally required. (Glover, J. , 1990, Causing Death and Saving Lives, London: Penguin. ) Before you call me crazy and ship me off to a mental ward let's examin Bioethics Philosopher John Hardwig's findings. He shows that a person's burden on their families may prove to be too much of a burden to where they cannot meet their moral duties and thus have no choice, but are required to die. (Hardwig, J. , 1996, “Dying at the Right Time: Reflections on Assisted and Unassisted Suicide,” in Ethics in Practice, H. LaFollette (ed. ), New York: Blackwell. ) During the Ukrainian Genocide of 1933, the Russians had taken all of the food and shipped it to the motherland while the Ukrianians starved to death. Things got so bad that parents would starve so their children didn't. They're children would be then shipped to Orphanages where they would then eat the skin of the weakest child in order to have food. You can see that all of these things were neccessary and completely justified under the resolution no matter how horrible it was. (. http://www.ukrainiangenocide.org...)