Mercy Killing: Acceptable or not? [a survey]

Okay, it took me some time, but I've decided to share this rather controversial topic with everyone. Mercy killing is, according to about.com:

An easy or painless death, or the intentional ending of the life of a person suffering from an incurable or painful disease at his or her request.

Still somewhat confused? Think Terry Schiavo: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terri_Schiavo

The only reason why I am bringing this controversial yet somewhat unrelated topic is because I have a data management ISU due Tuesday that is based off on this exact topic . And since most people from public transit decided to ignore me my little survey, I decided to bring it up over the web and see what happens. Now, I can simply give you guys the link to the survey, but this being a rather intelligent forum . I'd like your personal views/arguments on mercy killing. Is it acceptable? If so/if not, why?

Now, this being a controversial topic and all, I am quite sure than many of you may be offended, in that case, I apologize beforehand. No intent has been made to offend anyone, and I sincerely hope that I have not.

LINK TO SURVEY: http://www.polldaddy.com/s/2559725D5A762415/
(Please take this very short, one page, 4-minute survey, it's for a Data Management ISU that's due about four days from now and I have barely any respondents Anyone, regardless of age, may take this survey.)

Thank you all for taking your time, and I greatly appreciate it.
Reaver

What a strange term for it- mercy killing. Why not call it what people know it as, euthanasia or "pulling-the-plug".

I've said to my family a couple times that if I end up in a bed, with people taking care of me, lie a tomato or anything, I'd like them to pull the plug.

I'm interested to see what illini has to say about this.

I'm interested to see what illini has to say about this.

the guy's got a disability, he's not a vegetable ffs.

Unless I have missed something completely that would/has lead him or a family member to have to have made a decision like this

Dr. Kevorkian, anyone?

in some circumstances, I think it would be ok though.

the guy's got a disability, he's not a vegetable ffs.

Well, I'd be pretty fucked up if I couldn't walk/run/jump. I'd probably get emo-Drex.

Good topic, but honestly, I was disappointed with the survey. There was only one or two questions about mercy killing, and I don't remember a yes or no when it comes to finding mercy killing acceptable or not.

Edit: If I was brain-dead and causing my family a financial burden, I'd have the plug pulled. If I have a consciousness and was able to communicate, then no. I had to take some time to think about this. As for being disabled to the point of not having a capacity to do anything and under a lot of pain, I'm not sure about that one.

Well, you asked for it here it comes

As I sit here debating philosophy in a hotel in some shithole in Tennessee (I saw a giant cross within pissing distance of a huge porn shop, i love the south)...I sorta see both sides of this. There are some situations where i have no problem with it (Terri Schiavo). There was NOT evidence of thought...moaning is an instinctual thing; thats why babies know how to do it. The people wanting to keep her alive were not footing the bill. Since there was no (dammit i forgot what you call it...Advanced Directive) There was all the lovely fighting we all heard about. However, someones paraplegic and cant comprehend and wants someone to kill them? (coughcoughmilliondollarbabycoughcough) ((i also realize she was very sick and what not in the movie but Clint killing a cripple just was a little too ironic for me)). Fuck that. I guess its a pretty roundabout way of saying it but i'm neither for nor against; Every situation is different. If there is an advanced directive; it should be followed, period. If there isn't; if the person is married/civil union/has a long term life partner should have the say. I understand Parents may disagree but parents officlally give up their kid when they get married legally.

I havent been in an experience that was EXACTLY 'euthanasia' but when my grandpa was going through all his final shit he told everyone in my family "The day i can no longer understand what the doctor's tell me; thats when I'm ready to go' The morning before he died that happened. He could've lived longer on all the respirators and machine and shit but he made the decision on how to end his life. The pain went away and I'm glad he made the choice.

As for me, no doubt in my mind, if I was a vegetable or in absolutely incurable pain; i'd be all for pulling the plug...but i'd probly want 2 weeks of no brain activity...im a selfish bastard sometimes.
/end depressing post?

Thanks to all those who responded and took the survey.

Here's a little theory I cooked up just now. Has anyone wondered, how it would feel to be the person in the vegetative state?

Sure, he/she may not be able to respond to external stimuli, but could it be possible that, deep inside his/her brain, he/she is still able to construct conscious thought? How would it feel to be conscious inside a black void? I do not think that thought-reading devices have been created yet, so this cannot be verified. On the other hand, this also means that at the moment, it cannot be disproved.

Additionally, it has been said that certain patients actually awake from Persistent Vegetative State (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persistent ... e#Recovery), so some of you who agreed to have the "plugs pulled" may want to wait for up to a year before doing that.

Ultimately, what I'm trying to say is, we cannot say a person is not "conscious" simply because he/she/it cannot react to external stimuli. Perhaps there is some sort of conscious thinking involved in the patient, just that it lacks the proper methods to get it "out". Who knows? Perhaps all plants can think as well as we do, but they simply cannot convey the proper message through external actions.

Sounds crazy, doesn't it?

i have not and will not read any of this thread but based on the topic alone i say hell yes it is acceptable

Why the fuck not read it? You lost your reading glasses, eyesight acting up again old man?

Why the fuck not read it? You lost your reading glasses, eyesight acting up again old man?

lmao. i wont read it as the topic is probably all that i will find interesting in the thread, that and i am a lazy lazy man

I don 't see the point to these philosophical topics since they don't arrive at any purposeful conclusions; you just go around and around in circles.

Correct, because of people who don't read topics like Sauru - at least he admits it.

I don 't see the point to these philosophical topics since they don't arrive at any purposeful conclusions; you just go around and around in circles.

As opposed to posting multiple topics about being tall? Just curious. If it wasnt for the philosophy threads here (even if im usually fighting in them), i would've posted a goodbye thread long ago.

I don 't see the point to these philosophical topics since they don't arrive at any purposeful conclusions; you just go around and around in circles.

You live in a world with objective truth? One with practical applicable solutions for everything?

i live in a world with both objective truths that require practical applicable solutions. therefori believe that due to people waking up after being "brain dead" for many years i would say "mercy killing" would be wrong. if you accept mercy killings then you must accept abortion on the grounds that the baby is unwanted and the baby will not survive for days on end without care and therefore abortion, most likely, would be viewed as a mercy killing up to age 2. and frankly i believe abortion is wrong and therefore mercy killing is wrong in my view. that stated i would also i do not expect the government to be favour of this line of think due to the government has been put in place not by supposed Christians, nor is it run by them, but by God. and since man has choice these leaders have a choice to do what they want. God just puts them there as his mercenaries. and even mercenaries can jump ship. end of rant.

i live in a world with both objective truths

therefori believe ... i would say ... i believe ... in my view

Why do you bother to have your own opinions if there's an objective truth?

If it wasnt for the philosophy threads here (even if im usually fighting in them)

Are we still on the "discussion/argument = fighting" kick? Go to literally any other forum and you'll see that this is what they exist for.

Correct, because of people who don't read topics like Sauru - at least he admits it.

to be fair i read most topics, if i dont read it then i will say it in the post i am posting

i live in a world with both objective truths

therefori believe ... i would say ... i believe ... in my view

Why do you bother to have your own opinions if there's an objective truth?

because i hold my opinion as truth.

If it's the truth, how is there room for opinions if all other opinions are wrong? And don't both truth and opinions require some sort of non-supernatural evidence? Otherwise it's just belief or "faith" in my book.

At least you're honest. Puttinhonest.

Maybe it's actually Putt-In-Computers and he rips the components out of OEM machines and uses them as receptacles for miniature golf practice.

Maybe it's actually Putt-In-Computers and he rips the components out of OEM machines and uses them as receptacles for miniature golf practice.

i think we need to define objective truth here.

By definition, objective truth is absolute truth. The truth of an objective claim is defined to be entirely independent of subjective, or personal, influences. That is, if something is objectively true, then it is true for everyone. A subjective truth, on the other hand, is relative to the person who asserts it.

http://addofio.wordpress.com/2007/01/11 ... ive-truth/

the following is a prime example why abortion is wrong
http://www.challies.com/archives/articl ... der-an.php