Drug laws - should I be allowed to ingest any drug, since it is my body?

how is somebody going to strap themselves to kevorkian's machine, push the botton and NOT be giving consent? the waiver seems superfluous imo. kevorkian wasn't tried for murder was he?

The phrase is "establishment of religion". It does not have to be "a" particular religion.



Not necessarily. Virtually every society, religious or non-religious, has prohibitions against murder and stealing. They certainly have a basis independent of religion since they promote a stable and safe society. That's one reason why prohibiting assisted suicide is not an establishment of religion.

And that is all I was trying to get to. That one can be against assisted suicide without establishing a religion.

For what its worth, which socities are non-religious?

IMO - yes.

Just like I think prostitution should be legal.....

i dont think these are the types of things that would be covered by physician-assisted suicide. also, who would be punished? the "expression" killing sounds like murder and the patient isn't doing it by their hand/directive.

a tragic case to be sure. certainly should be an impetus for people creating living wills. keeping her "alive" wasn't keeping her "living" and she had no possibility to "live" at any time in the future. technology makes many of these ethical questions so much trickier because they open up avenues which were not even though of before.

it is. but unlike assisted suicide, the victim isn't making the decision so her rights are never considered. in assisted suicide, the rights of the individual are being compared with the morality of the society.

Ok, so you are weighing the morality vs. the individual and siding with individual. My libertarian streak likes that.

I honestly don't know how I feel about assisted suicide. The difference between stopping treatment and actively doing something to end your life.

Misfeasance vs. nonfeasance.

i'm not an animal!


i really feel the same way. it's like abortion to me: what a horrible horrible dilemma! but yet i don't want to NOT make it a dilemma for the parties involved.

Perish the thought of the people petitioning their elected representatives to pass laws or not that express their values. It doesn't really matter though. Obama/Clinton 08 will make all things better.

I dont see where the dilemma is. It seems to me that the person that wants to die and the person assisting would not be objecting (obviously).

IMO - no. Not ANY drug - but only because of the side-effects. Ingesting a drug that could cause your actions while on that drug to adversly affect others is an issue. Ingest a drug that has no harm on others - go for it!

huh? the constitution is in place for (among other things) to protect the minority from the masses. in this example, the rights of the individual are pretty overwhelming.

I guess that makes pot ok

Thinking career change?

dilemma in arbotion: keep the child and everything that goes with that or abort the child and everything that goes with that.

dilemma in AS: get rid of the pain vs potentially going straight to [censored]

the only thing(s) that makes it NOT ok are fear of change and hypocrisy.

Very good point...but how do you decide which ones are okay and which arent? If you look at it that way, alcohol could be considered a drug.

Should the courts then declare the legislative process dormant?
Who is the minority. Those who disagree?

Or, more to the point, without establishing religion generally in violation of the First Amendment.

There have been small groups of people that have banded together in non-religious societies, but if you mean at a country level, the examples that come to mind would probably be certain of the Communist countries.

But, today, there would not really be any countries that are non-religious.

they can't. have you never heard of a law being declared unconstutional?

those desiring to have AS. if a law was passed by a majority of the people to make AS illegal, wouldn't that by definition makes those wanting AS in the minority?

People in NAMBLA wish to have statutory rape laws declared unconstitutional. Does their new found status as a minority grant them constitutional relief from the tyranny of the majority? At what point do you draw the line?

how many parties are there in man-boy 'love'?

IMO, alcohol is much more destructive.