there are some issues that are, for wont of a better term, 'intrinsically evil, such as torture, rape, prostitution, human trafficking, slavery, character assassination, drug addiction, pornography, kinghitting strangers in the public domain, and, yes, abortion and suicide.

if the above statement has left few readers at this point, it shows how easily and how casually ethics has become divorced from 'choice', as if that were all that really mattered. Legal injecting rooms, legalised brothels, changing vocabulary like 'sex worker' from 'prostitute' or 'compassionate release' from assisted suicide show how people generally are becoming desensitised to moral matters.

Suicide matters because the intentional self murder of an individual diminishes us all, and if that doesn't matter, then John Donne's bell will one day toll for you, but no one else will hear it.

Ok, but if we take the approach that it's a good thing that suicide is decriminalised, "my life, my choice" etc, then does that mean that people who are more resolved and who carry out their plans successfully should be granted that right, or even encouraged to do the deed, whereas someone who is slightly more ambivalent, and whom can be found teetering on the edge of a cliff, incapacitated by indecision, is subject to the full force of prevention efforts?

I just think this debate is so much more complex than the writer portrays. It's easy and uncontroversial to take a public health approach... but this is never going to be sufficiently engaging because there are other more primary issues intrinsically associated, for example whether life has any inherent, subjective or objective value, and whether we can trust ourselves to accurately interpret others’ thoughts and intentions.

To take a personal example, back in the late-90s when I was 16-19ish, and when I suspected and feared that life was meaningless and happiness impossible, I came pretty damn close to topping myself (and I’ll note here that nobody at the time asked me whether I was ok. They just told me what a twat I was for getting myself in that predicament in the first place, then left me to my own devices). I suppose what got me through was the thought of how my committing suicide would affect my family.

But here I am still here, now totally convinced that life *is* meaningless and happiness impossible. The reason I don’t think about killing myself now is because I just don’t care anymore, and simply content myself with scraping any fleetingly pleasurable experience off my shoe as I trudge along through it all. But to what end? How could anyone possibly say that this is a preferable outcome than if I had died at 16 with my innocence, dignity, and faith in the sanctity of life intact?

Basically, I would argue, that to advocate against suicide is ultimately nothing but selfishness, emanating from half-baked belief systems and lack of intellectual courage.

PRAY TO "THE" VIRGIN!

Paul: This is why I found it objectionable in the extreme that SBS television should choose to show a pro-suicide documentary on the evening of the 23rd of September – less than two weeks after World Suicide Prevention Day.

Before I get into the suicide, let me answer the above dilemma. Have you ever notices how the Media, TV or Newspaper, will do a story on, say, a dad who is doing a wonderful job raising his children on his own. On the same page, above & below, is a report on a rapist & a paedophile. Or, a story on a Nudist Beach or Club/Resort sandwiched in with a story on rapists & paedophiles. Media seems to do this all the time. It’s the same with suicides. They say it’s not intentional.
I don’t think you can dump all suicides into one type. There are many reasons for people committing suicide. Terminal illness is only one reason. Mental illness is another which can be categorized even further. Many mental illnesses can be helped but some can’t. Bad hair days, debt, loss, helplessness, etc. These types are preventable with counselling. Other types of clinical mental illness are not dealt with as easily.

I know I’ll get lambasted for this, but, some people with Mental Illnesses are better off if left to suicide. Self cleansing of the Gene Pool, if you like. It’s not Politically Correct & a lot of people have an “I don’t want to know” attitude. There is an awful lot of energy & money from family, friends & Governments wasted keeping these people alive.

Terminal Illness, are we keeping these people alive because it makes us feel good or for the betterment of the patient. The former I think. We are the ones who don’t wish to let go, in the case of family. Possibly money, in the case of the medical profession, in spite of their claim of the Hypocrite Oath. (Purposely misspelt) If these people are at a point where they are ready to go. Who are we to refuse them that wish? Do we really have that Right? These people wish to end their constant pain & suffering. Analogy; Hang of a bar with your feet of the ground for as long as you can, at some point you will have to just let go. Should someone tie you to that bar so you can’t let go. Would you consider that to be torture? Would you keep someone alive, who is in constant pain & suffering, because you can’t bear to see them go? Would you call that torture?

Paul: I wonder at what effect the seemingly constant attempts at legalising euthanasia have in this respect – not to mention the macabre media grandstanding on suicide by the likes of Philip Nitschke which seems to pass without criticism in our national media.

Is it Nitschkes fault. The Media is always looking for stories they know will sell papers. They drag a story up until it gets to a useby date then they find another story. If a story doesn't raise sales the Media will drop it fast.

You claim of Nitchke grandstanding in front of the Media shows your bias. Here is a problem that's on the "Taboo" list so we'll make out that anyone in favour is the "bad guy."

I watched the SBS documentary and I found it very interesting. There
is no good reason not to discuss this topic and to see exactly what
happens in other, more enlightened countries, such as Switzerland.

Now we know that Paul, as a good Catholic, takes the religious
viewpoint that only God should decide as to when he will gasp his
last breath and under what circumstances.

Personally I want a choice in the matter. That choice should be none
of the church's business. If I am riddled with cancer or have a brain
trapped in a none functioning body, it should be my decision is life
is worth living or not.

Exit Switzerland, which is seperate from Exit International, has
drawn up a great set of guidlines by which they operate. We could use
them as a guide as to the kind of laws that we could introduce in
Australia, avoiding much pain and suffering for those who choose to
make their own decision about their lives. Let the church preach to
its flock and keep out of my business and the business of other
Australians who don't have much regard for their opinion

"This is why I found it objectionable in the extreme that SBS television should choose to show a pro-suicide documentary..."

Ah, here we have the real Catholic message, carefully hidden behind a pretence of concern over the suicides of healthy people: how dare people assert their control over their own lives and their own bodies! Even those who are sick, who are dying, who are in excruciating pain, must be denied release because Paul's Invisible Friend doesn't like it. Or so Paul thinks, the Invisible Friend having been very quiet about this (and everything else) for a good many centuries now.

Possibly the rise in suicides is due to an increasing realisation that each person has the ultimate responsibility for their own life and their own death, and that if life becomes intolerable you have the right to do something about it -- no matter what the man in the frock says.

But I do find it fascinating that Paul and all the other anti-assisted-dying and anti-choice authors here find it necessary to conceal their religious stance in their articles. It's almost as if they are ashamed of it -- as if they felt it was irrational and stupid, or something.

http://www.ccfmtn.org/leave-legacy.htm

I particularly like this Catholic advert, stating that you can
"convert earthly treasures to heavenly ones".

Sheesh, you can take it with you after all, by leaving your money
to the church!

So let me see. The Vatican is seriously rich, the largest owner of
real estate on the planet, I have been told. They have large
investments in palliative care. So if I choose not to go into
one of their homes for a year or two, they will certainly lose
revenue. How much money does the church earn per year from legacies?
All that valuable real estate, from people who have no children,
if they can be convinced that they can take it with them.

So it seems clearly in the financial interests of the Vatican to
heavily lobby against euthanasia, as it could cost them serious
money

The author states "We need to reject the subtle and not-so-subtle messages that might, overtime blur our minds to the reality that regardless of circumstances, no suicides are all right."
I never fails to amaze me the arrogance of certain individuals who believe that they have a better knowledge of what is in my (and everybody elses) interests than I do myself. I can think of many instances where suicide might be a perfectly reasonable solution to a persons problems.
If a person is suffering from constant physical or psychological pain then suicide may be a perfectly reasonable course of action. Whilst I don't agree with legalizing euthanasia, the choice to end ones own life is a very important choice and under some circumstances may be the best course of action for an individual.

For Paul Russel to equate a sad teenager in the prime of life with an eighty year-old in the agony of a terminal illness is sickening. The author clearly enjoys knowing that people suffer; he probably feels ennobled by their pain and misery - closer to his god perhaps. I sincerely hope the last years of his life are spent in intolerable pain and agony so he too can ennoble the people around him.
He's worried about youth suicides - Ha! The majority of youth suicides are by young gay boys whose self esteem and desire to live has been extinguished as a direct result of Roman Catholic [and some other religions] insistence that homosexuality is a sin. The sin is in driving healthy young people to suicide, Paul, not in deciding, after having had a good life, that one is ready to die.
This irrational and callous essay is typical of dogmatic religious bigotry that has ruined the lives of so many millions throughout history. Religions and gods are the creations of the humans who worship them. They have no universal worth, they are only useful for those who need them and they have nothing to do with life and death. We all do that on our own, and should be allowed to do it on our own terms.