Paternalism is the idea that the state can act in ways that protect us from ourselves. They are laws like seat belt laws or laws that make drug use illegal. What right does the state have to step in and tell me what I can and cannot do to myself? The state has no right to make it illegal for me to kill myself if I am so inclined. These laws only serve as stepping stones for continued creeping over the line of liberty. If Im a rational autonomous adult then my life and liberty should only be in my hands with the exceptions of accidents.

Mercy reply. ::)

Lol this is important tho

I mean if I want to go duel someone because we cant come up with a better resolution to our differences then (assuming we both agree to it) we should be able to go out and attempt to kill one another government shouldnt restrict me from doing what I want with my life

Yes, lets fall into anarchy and we'll have a harmonious country, like Afghanistan. ::)

I think part of the whole thing against suicide may very well be to keep the rest of the public safe. For instance, if you jump off of an overpass and you hit a vehicle below, it could cause serious problems. Or if you crash your automobile into something to kill yourself, you endanger others.

Theres a big difference between anarchy and a government that doesnt involve itself in the affairs of the citizens. Laws would still be in place to govern interaction between people but laws that tell me I cant do something to myself are out of line for any government to be telling me

Well... without laws to govern what people can and cannot do in their lives you end up in anarchy...

[quote author=Telos link=board=6;threadid=5603;start=0#msg47568 date=1078456487]
Laws would still be in place to govern interaction between people but laws that tell me I cant do something to myself are out of line for any government to be telling me
[/quote]

There just shouldnt be laws telling me what I can or cant do with my and only my life

[quote]Laws would still be in place to govern interaction between people[/quote]

[quote]There just shouldnt be laws telling me what I can or cant do with my and only my life
[/quote]

That is called a contradiction.

No DarkMinion the idea is that we have laws in place to prevent me from constituting harm (physical) to other members of society but not ones to prevent me from causing harm to myself as long as it doesnt harm others

[quote author=Hazard link=board=6;threadid=5603;start=0#msg47567 date=1078456433]
I think part of the whole thing against suicide may very well be to keep the rest of the public safe. For instance, if you jump off of an overpass and you hit a vehicle below, it could cause serious problems. Or if you crash your automobile into something to kill yourself, you endanger others.
[/quote]

What kind of a moron would jump into moving traffic from an overpass that would be one of the most painful ways to die//paralyze yourself and end up in a wheelchair forever.
I'd be more into going to the gas station, buying $1s worth of gas, dispensing it on myself, and lighting a cigarette. On the serious side though, I used to agree with you telos but then you have to realize how dumb half the population is. It would result in chaos. So, those of us that would be able to do as we please to ourselves without killing others have to suffer.

I equate these laws with the "0th law of Robotics". We create laws not only to protect humans, but to protect humanity. The laws are proper as they do ensure domestic tranquility and provide for the common welfare. The former and latter are both satisfied by anti-suicide attempt laws.

To combat your argument how dumb would you have to be to kill yourself in the first place?

[quote]
I equate these laws with the "0th law of Robotics". We create laws not only to protect humans, but to protect humanity. The laws are proper as they do ensure domestic tranquility and provide for the common welfare. The former and latter are both satisfied by anti-suicide attempt laws.
[/quote]

Im not sure Asimovs are all that applicable here. What youve said is that having laws that restrict individual liberty is good because it prevents other individuals from knowing that they have the option to do something different/or bad for themselves as the case may be. I dont think that you can honestly say that potential psychological harm is a viable justification for restricting my rights.

[quote]
To combat your argument how dumb would you have to be to kill yourself in the first place?
[/quote]

As dumb as you were to make that post. This isnt about suicide its about the right to do so if you wanted to.

[quote author=crashtestdummy link=board=6;threadid=5603;start=0#msg47599 date=1078462443]
On the serious side though, I used to agree with you telos but then you have to realize how dumb half the population is. It would result in chaos. So, those of us that would be able to do as we please to ourselves without killing others have to suffer.
[/quote]

Read On The Origin of Species and when you get it come back to the free side :P

Otherwise known as the paranoid, against all authority, "you can't tell me what to do", narrow-minded kiddy side?

DM theres a huge difference between saying the government should let me do anything I want to do period and the government should let me do what I want to do to myself. It doesnt have anything to do with "you cant tell me what to do" anti-authority gothism or whatever dysphemisms you want to put on it. The fact of the matter is that the government oversteps its authority in creating laws that tell me what I cannot do with my own life particularly in situations where others are not affected.

The laws are in place because, more often than not, what you do to yourself either directly or indirectly effects other people.

If you argue against that you are beyond stupid.

Yes it affects other people but as long as it doesnt constitute harm to them then what does it matter? If I dont wear my seatbelt while driving and I get into a crash am I harming anyone but myself? Maybe in the unlikely event that my corpse flies through the windshield and suffocates someone or something. If I choose to become addicted to heroin is it causing harm to anyone else? No.

[quote author=Telos link=board=6;threadid=5603;start=15#msg47722 date=1078517449]
Yes it affects other people but as long as it doesnt constitute harm to them then what does it matter? If I dont wear my seatbelt while driving and I get into a crash am I harming anyone but myself? Maybe in the unlikely event that my corpse flies through the windshield and suffocates someone or something. If I choose to become addicted to heroin is it causing harm to anyone else? No.
[/quote]

If you don't wear your seatbelt while driving and get into a crash, it may cause emotional injury to your relatives. Like suicide. It may also cost money to treat your injuries.

Reasons for forbidding drugs could be that they affect people so they behave irresponsibly, that they cause injuries which will cost money to treat, that they cause death (see question 1), or just that people are too stupid to know their own good. Of course, alcohol should be illegal as well, it's just that they haven't realized that yet.

One good reason for outlawing various things that only affect yourself is that you're most likely going to regret doing them. If the risk of you regretting doing it multiplied by some badness factor is greater than the chance of you appreciating it multiplied by some goodness factor by a large enough margin, it may be forbidden.

[quote author=Adron link=board=6;threadid=5603;start=15#msg47808 date=1078534749]
If you don't wear your seatbelt while driving and get into a crash, it may cause emotional injury to your relatives. Like suicide. It may also cost money to treat your injuries.
[/quote]

Psychological harm isnt a valid concern. Look at the court system we have criminal courts for crimes and civil courts for when someone spills coffee on themselves and needs someone to blame for their mental anguish. As to the issue of economic harm if you give your informed consent to disobey a government recommendation (like wearing seatbelts or doing drugs) then youve waived the governments financial liability for you in those settings. Its a very good system of personal responsibility.

[quote author=Adron link=board=6;threadid=5603;start=15#msg47808 date=1078534749]
Reasons for forbidding drugs could be that they affect people so they behave irresponsibly, that they cause injuries which will cost money to treat, that they cause death (see question 1), or just that people are too stupid to know their own good. Of course, alcohol should be illegal as well, it's just that they haven't realized that yet.
[/quote]

See answer 1

[quote author=Adron link=board=6;threadid=5603;start=15#msg47808 date=1078534749]
One good reason for outlawing various things that only affect yourself is that you're most likely going to regret doing them. If the risk of you regretting doing it multiplied by some badness factor is greater than the chance of you appreciating it multiplied by some goodness factor by a large enough margin, it may be forbidden.
[/quote]

This is why people are able to make mistakes. The phrase live and learn has origins in the stupidity of people and their regrets after the fact. If a person regrets doing something then logically they shouldnt do it again. If they do it again and make it into the darwin awards then thats great but I still dont think the government should limit their rights to do it

[quote author=Telos link=board=6;threadid=5603;start=15#msg47813 date=1078538158]
[quote author=Adron link=board=6;threadid=5603;start=15#msg47808 date=1078534749]
If you don't wear your seatbelt while driving and get into a crash, it may cause emotional injury to your relatives. Like suicide. It may also cost money to treat your injuries.
[/quote]

Psychological harm isnt a valid concern. Look at the court system we have criminal courts for crimes and civil courts for when someone spills coffee on themselves and needs someone to blame for their mental anguish. As to the issue of economic harm if you give your informed consent to disobey a government recommendation (like wearing seatbelts or doing drugs) then youve waived the governments financial liability for you in those settings. Its a very good system of personal responsibility.[/quote]

Motorcycle helmet laws are another example of this, and these laws have withstood Constitutional scrutiny. In reality, motorcyclists not wearing helmets is a personal choice that has significant effects on society. Riders who crash consume hospital resources of doctors, nurses, and spaces, and mostly do not have their own adequate insurance for the hundreds of thousands it costs to do brain repair. These costs historically have fallen them to indigent status, and the hospitals collected from the states.

While you are not talking about motorcycle helmets, but presumably euthenasia(sp), I am showing you that personal choice has an effect on humanity, not just a single human, and it is the humanity's duty and right to protect itself by protecting you. We will judge you irrational and insane, and in need of protection and treatment, by defining your choice as irrational and insane.

Our Constitution requires that the government provide not just for individual liberty and persuit of happiness, but for the Common Welfare. To that end we enact laws that may encroach on seemingly personal rights.

Which was probably the reason that I said people who choose to go against what would be recommendations like helmet/seat belt laws would sign a waiver based on their informed consent that what they are doing carries serious risks and that they knowingly accept that we will leave their brains hanging from their crushed skulls in the event of an accident.

[quote author=Telos link=board=6;threadid=5603;start=15#msg47832 date=1078541940]
Which was probably the reason that I said people who choose to go against what would be recommendations like helmet/seat belt laws would sign a waiver based on their informed consent that what they are doing carries serious risks and that they knowingly accept that we will leave their brains hanging from their crushed skulls in the event of an accident.
[/quote]
And you really think anything like that would ever happen? Do you think they would bother to check if you signed a waiver or not? No! They're going to try to save your fucking life no matter what. It's their job.

And it would be their job to not bother with people who have waived their right to help? Did you even think it through before posting or do you just live somewhere with magical ambulances that appear the instant after an accident?

[quote author=Telos link=board=6;threadid=5603;start=15#msg47845 date=1078545606]
And it would be their job to not bother with people who have waived their right to help? Did you even think it through before posting or do you just live somewhere with magical ambulances that appear the instant after an accident?
[/quote]
When someone is in an accident they get there as fast as they can and immedietley treat the wounded, they would never waste time looking up a bullshit waiver. What are they going to do, leave a guy there with his head split open while they dig out his wallet to find his name?

With the drug thing, it's just a matter of time before pot is legal. Prostitution is legalized in parts of nevada since they figured out a good system to set it up where they can tax it. They will figure out how they wanna tax marijuana soon enough.

[quote author=Hitmen link=board=6;threadid=5603;start=15#msg47846 date=1078545861]
When someone is in an accident they get there as fast as they can and immedietley treat the wounded, they would never waste time looking up a bullshit waiver. What are they going to do, leave a guy there with his head split open while they dig out his wallet to find his name?
[/quote]

Ok once again the ambulance does not magically appear someone has to call for it.

"Hi Id like to report an accident its an emergency"
"Ok where is it?"
"This place"
"Ok ambulance is on its way now please give me license plates of vehicles involved"
"XXX-XXX and XXX-XXX"
[2 seconds of computer lookup later]
"Sir theyve both filed waivers for their medical rights the ambulance is returning"
"What about the cars blocking my way?"
"Theyll be moved you have a nice day now"

[quote author=Telos link=board=6;threadid=5603;start=15#msg47856 date=1078550100]
Ok once again the ambulance does not magically appear someone has to call for it.

"Hi Id like to report an accident its an emergency"
"Ok where is it?"
"This place"
"Ok ambulance is on its way now please give me license plates of vehicles involved"
"XXX-XXX and XXX-XXX"
[2 seconds of computer lookup later]
"Sir theyve both filed waivers for their medical rights the ambulance is returning"
"What about the cars blocking my way?"
"Theyll be moved you have a nice day now"
[/quote]

Right, and people without medical insurance or people who can't afford to pay their hospital bills die on the pavement. You're talking about devaluing human life by putting a price tag on it in some way or another.

RE: original topic of "Father Knows Best": This isn't a black or white issue. The state doesn't have to protect everyone from themselves or let everyone be responsible for themselves. The American government and most governments are somewhere in between. Cocaine is illegal; Supersized McDonalds fries coated in grease and obscene amounts of salt are legal.

Let's say your girlfriend//wife borrowed your car. She gets in a wreck with your license plate numbers. Then she dies, because you signed a waiver. Then you would have a reason to commit suicide.

And I think it was George Carlin who said this in regards to cigarettes," If ketchup had half the carcinogens that tobacco had. They would be off the shelf tomorrow."

[quote author=Telos link=board=6;threadid=5603;start=15#msg47813 date=1078538158]

This is why people are able to make mistakes. The phrase live and learn has origins in the stupidity of people and their regrets after the fact. If a person regrets doing something then logically they shouldnt do it again. If they do it again and make it into the darwin awards then thats great but I still dont think the government should limit their rights to do it
[/quote]

That's only valid for the things that don't cause permanent consequences to them. Making a mistake that can be undone is OK, but making the mistake of getting your brain half crushed and being turned into a vegetable is not.

[quote author=Adron link=board=6;threadid=5603;start=30#msg47893 date=1078574583]
That's only valid for the things that don't cause permanent consequences to them. Making a mistake that can be undone is OK, but making the mistake of getting your brain half crushed and being turned into a vegetable is not.
[/quote]

Guess you should have demonstrated some foresight?

[quote author=crashtestdummy link=board=6;threadid=5603;start=15#msg47860 date=1078552086]
Let's say your girlfriend//wife borrowed your car. She gets in a wreck with your license plate numbers. Then she dies, because you signed a waiver. Then you would have a reason to commit suicide.

And I think it was George Carlin who said this in regards to cigarettes," If ketchup had half the carcinogens that tobacco had. They would be off the shelf tomorrow."
[/quote]

Youre arguing semantics the point is that people should just have the right to choose what they do to themselves

[quote author=K link=board=6;threadid=5603;start=15#msg47858 date=1078551720]
Right, and people without medical insurance or people who can't afford to pay their hospital bills die on the pavement. You're talking about devaluing human life by putting a price tag on it in some way or another.

RE: original topic of "Father Knows Best": This isn't a black or white issue. The state doesn't have to protect everyone from themselves or let everyone be responsible for themselves. The American government and most governments are somewhere in between. Cocaine is illegal; Supersized McDonalds fries coated in grease and obscene amounts of salt are legal.
[/quote]

Wtf are you talking about? Im saying only people who waive their right to medical assistance die on the pavement how is that putting a price tag on anything?

Yes there are some completely unhealthy things that are legal cigarettes foods high in fat and/or sugar content alcohol and we should have the right to do those things as well as the right to do the others like cocaine if we want to. The reason the government doesnt restrict all of those liberties is because they know at some point people just wont stand for it (ie prohibition)

[quote author=Telos link=board=6;threadid=5603;start=30#msg47900 date=1078583336]
[quote author=crashtestdummy link=board=6;threadid=5603;start=15#msg47860 date=1078552086]
Let's say your girlfriend//wife borrowed your car. She gets in a wreck with your license plate numbers. Then she dies, because you signed a waiver. Then you would have a reason to commit suicide.

And I think it was George Carlin who said this in regards to cigarettes," If ketchup had half the carcinogens that tobacco had. They would be off the shelf tomorrow."
[/quote]

Youre arguing semantics the point is that people should just have the right to choose what they do to themselves
[/quote]

No, I'm saying what you do yourself affects everyone else around you. Your simple call to 911 and the police not coming becasue of a license plate number is absurd. Let's just send a tow truck and have the coroner meet them at the impound yard....

[quote author=crashtestdummy link=board=6;threadid=5603;start=30#msg47924 date=1078609155]
[quote author=Telos link=board=6;threadid=5603;start=30#msg47900 date=1078583336]
[quote author=crashtestdummy link=board=6;threadid=5603;start=15#msg47860 date=1078552086]
Let's say your girlfriend//wife borrowed your car. She gets in a wreck with your license plate numbers. Then she dies, because you signed a waiver. Then you would have a reason to commit suicide.

And I think it was George Carlin who said this in regards to cigarettes," If ketchup had half the carcinogens that tobacco had. They would be off the shelf tomorrow."
[/quote]

Youre arguing semantics the point is that people should just have the right to choose what they do to themselves
[/quote]

No, I'm saying what you do yourself affects everyone else around you. Your simple call to 911 and the police not coming becasue of a license plate number is absurd. Let's just send a tow truck and have the coroner meet them at the impound yard....
[/quote]

Dude, give it up, your point doesn't even make sense. You certainly didn't prove that the affects on other people have any bearing whatsoever on the person's right to doing what they want with THEIR body.

[quote author=Moonshine link=board=6;threadid=5603;start=30#msg48007 date=1078628696]
Dude, give it up, your point doesn't even make sense. You certainly didn't prove that the affects on other people have any bearing whatsoever on the person's right to doing what they want with THEIR body.
[/quote]

Because producing, feeding, and raising THEIR body is an investment the society has made, the society expects them to keep their body in good enough shape to produce a reasonable pay off.

Because restoring THEIR body after they go get themselves into an accident without wearing a seatbelt is going to cost the society even more money, the society has the right to forbid them from engaging in such dangerous acts.

But apart from that, once you reach the age of retirement, I wouldn't mind you signing a waiver of rights and then going off to kill yourself at your leisure.

Are you really saying that after someone has aged to the point where they can no longer contribute to society then they can do what they want with their life or did I misinterpret you?

If you really want to kill yourself, and are not insane, you would just do it. As society we recognize that if you are stating you want to kill yourself that it is a call for help. Society is set up to protect humanity, not just individual humans, and thus we treat you as part of the whole. Your insane actions to damage part of the whole are what is illegal. We will treat your condition, even if it kills you :)

Okay sure, I agree with people can't interfere with "the whole's" rights or whatnot. However, how does this make doing drugs illegal (or other "illegal" activities relative in nature herein)? Certainly the argument would be "well it LEADS to crime most times and etc etc." Well if you're going to have a mind-set such as that... why not be racist? Statistically it's a sound bet to think minorities do crime a lot more, isn't it (don't challenge me on this, I could be wrong, but you should get the point anyways)? Crime certainly isn't the *direct* result of doing drugs -- the same with being any other race, having any other beliefs system, etc (within reason).

You also need to keep in mind that unless you're deliberately trying to "fuck with someone's mind" so to speak, the fact that one gets offense or psychological displeasure from one other's action is just tough luck; because honestly, I bet you can find someone who would take offense to just about anything you do nowadays.

I think you put it best when you said basically: if someone is going to kill themselves.. they'll just do it. The same goes for any "Illegal" activity pertaining to something infringing upon our rights (under me and telos' argumentative idealogy here). Punishment over such things is just the wrong way to go about it, period; as shown with the losing "war on drugs," etc. It's simply wrong, and not the way.

EDIT:
One more thing: shame on those of whom are throwing or have thrown personal attacks at telos throughout this thread, just because he doesn't have conservative or juxtapositional ideals like yourselves. I won't mention who has done this, but you have to realize that calling him a "fool" or "idiot" or equivilent is just an ignorant response, and it shows hypocrisy. Let's have an intellectual debate here, not some ignorant personal attack fest. :)

[quote author=Telos link=board=6;threadid=5603;start=30#msg48325 date=1078754249]
Are you really saying that after someone has aged to the point where they can no longer contribute to society then they can do what they want with their life or did I misinterpret you?
[/quote]

I'm not fully convinced about that. My main point was that while you're young, you've probably cost society more than you've repaid. So at that time, you have a kind of "debt" to the society.

[quote author=Moonshine link=board=6;threadid=5603;start=30#msg48344 date=1078765369]I won't mention who has done this, but you have to realize that calling him a "fool" or "idiot" or equivilent is just an ignorant response, and it shows hypocrisy. Let's have an intellectual debate here, not some ignorant personal attack fest. :)[/quote]

You're stupid for saying this. Only a moron would appeal to losers who cannot refrain from mudslinging. I think you should be shot and shipped to momma in a pine box.

[quote author=Grok link=board=6;threadid=5603;start=30#msg48376 date=1078777146]
[quote author=Moonshine link=board=6;threadid=5603;start=30#msg48344 date=1078765369]I won't mention who has done this, but you have to realize that calling him a "fool" or "idiot" or equivilent is just an ignorant response, and it shows hypocrisy. Let's have an intellectual debate here, not some ignorant personal attack fest. :)[/quote]

You're stupid for saying this. Only a moron would appeal to losers who cannot refrain from mudslinging. I think you should be shot and shipped to momma in a pine box.
[/quote]

Stop trying to kill me! ;D

The only thing I said about drugs was that pot would be legal, soon. I do drugs occasionaly. I used to do them a lot. I think the war on drugs is complete crap to an extent. But, you do have people who have absolutely no self-control or self-discipline, they go out and do certain drugs then they start robbing people and selling everybodies shit for dope. So, the people who can handle their shit, just do drugs occasionally are outright banned.

[quote author=crashtestdummy link=board=6;threadid=5603;start=30#msg48398 date=1078782562]
The only thing I said about drugs was that pot would be legal, soon. I do drugs occasionaly. I used to do them a lot. I think the war on drugs is complete crap to an extent. But, you do have people who have absolutely no self-control or self-discipline, they go out and do certain drugs then they start robbing people and selling everybodies shit for dope. So, the people who can handle their shit, just do drugs occasionally are outright banned.
[/quote]

See, you do drugs... do you consider yourself a criminal and or morally wrong person? I would assume not (heh). I agree that drugs are definitely related to a lot of crime, and there are people who cannot handle themselves. The thing is, they should not be punished for their actions of DOING drugs (the means), they should be punished for the end result, which is assault, robbery, etc.

[quote author=Telos link=board=6;threadid=5603;start=0#msg47518 date=1078445526]
What right does the state have to step in and tell me what I can and cannot do to myself?[/quote]

Even John Locke, who is the thinker from which libertarianism comes, said that it is not within a person's rights to do something that would hurt themselves (that may be more specific as to killing themselves; I know with certainty that he said it was not within someone's rights to take his/her own life).

That's irrelevant though.. what IS relevant is whether he's right or not, lol :P

[quote author=Moonshine link=board=6;threadid=5603;start=45#msg48470 date=1078799349]
That's irrelevant though.. what IS relevant is whether he's right or not, lol :P
[/quote]
Which, of course, is subjective depending on who you ask.

There's a reason none of you are in positions of authority and never will be.

Yep, I'm a criminal. But, it's ok to do legal mind altering drugs.

[quote author=DarkMinion link=board=6;threadid=5603;start=45#msg48492 date=1078811355]
There's a reason none of you are in positions of authority and never will be.
[/quote]

Exactly, because drug users could never be like, mayor of Washington, D.C.

Or president of the United States for that matter

[quote author=Telos link=board=6;threadid=5603;start=45#msg48519 date=1078838158]
Or president of the United States for that matter
[/quote]

We had a President who abused drugs?

Maybe not abused but certainly used

[quote author=DarkMinion link=board=6;threadid=5603;start=45#msg48492 date=1078811355]
I love you and want to have your babies, DM.
[/quote]

Last I looked, this wasn't a debate about whether we wanted to be in authority positions or not..?


[quote]
Posted by: Hitmen Posted on: Yesterday at 11:33:23pm
Quote from: Moonshine on Yesterday at 08:29:09pm
That's irrelevant though.. what IS relevant is whether he's right or not, lol

Which, of course, is subjective depending on who you ask.
[/quote]

Not necessarily; if given enough facts at the base of an issue, one can form an opinion almost completely based on objectivity. There is of course, a certain level of subjectivity in almost all of one's opinions pertaining to philosophically related premises -- but this of course is to be expected. It comes with the ground. However, if someone were to give you a convincing argument (based on objectivity) on something philosophical, one would be so inclined to accept it -- as long as the arguments were sound.
[quote][/quote]

[quote author=DarkMinion link=board=6;threadid=5603;start=45#msg48492 date=1078811355]
There's a reason none of you are in positions of authority and never will be.
[/quote]

mahahahahaha you will see! one day I will rule you all!

Grok will be my technology advisor....

Hrm, I'd have to hire vL to be my elite hax0rz team.