Did anyone see Phillip Nitshkes Twitter today?

[IrRegularjoe]

Keep in mind it's the same guy that doesn't believe that you should have access to the PPH unless your terminally ill or over 50. Never shuts up about rational suicide. Yet his Twitter today was fucking stupid. Check it out.

 

[ExitStageLeft]

He's right about life without parole. He's just wrong about access to the PPH.

 

[Superdeterminist]

Did he really say that about the PPH? That's surprising. I would think that he would be in support of everyone having access to it. Philip strikes me as a saint, we are in desperate need of more people like him if we ever want to see a pro-choice world. I agree with him that prisoners should be offered a peaceful death sentence as an alternative to prison time. People don't like to talk about it, but being locked up is grossly inhumane. It's easy to ignore the inhumanity of imprisonment when one considers how atrocious some crimes are. But the truth is that torturing criminals doesn't benefit anyone. They are locked up in order to keep the public safe, and that is obviously vital. But we only do so because we lack the knowledge and technology to fix their dysfunctional brains. In a perfect world, which currently we are too ignorant to manifest, there are no prisons.

 

[rt1989526]

Strange. Pretty sure Exit supported euthanasia case of a 27 year old Canadian man who had mental illness.

 

[IrRegularjoe]

Strange. Pretty sure Exit supported euthanasia case of a 27 year old Canadian man who had mental illness.

Your right. But he was an exception.

 

[Misfit72]

Is that the one about Brenton Tarrant's much deserved life sentence? It doesn't help Nitschke's case that he mentioned Frank Van den Bleeken, the Belgian rapist and murderer, as a legal precedent for euthanasia in prison, given that the Belgian government later refused to allow him to go ahead with it.

 

[IrRegularjoe]

Is that the one about Brenton Tarrant's much deserved life sentence? It doesn't help Nitschke's case that he mentioned Frank Van den Bleeken, the Belgian rapist and murderer, as a legal precedent for euthanasia in prison, given that the Belgian government later refused to allow him to go ahead with it.

Yes, it is.

 

[EmbraceOfTheVoid]

I don't agree with Nitshke, people should be held accountable for their actions and letting murderers get off scot-free via euthanasia is a awful proposal to me. The current system doesn't work though because it doesn't realistically benefit anyone but I'm against allowing them to get voluntary euthanasia, they should spend their lives creating clothes for the homeless or something along those lines.

 

[TAW122]

He's right about life without parole. He's just wrong about access to the PPH.

I agree with you, I think anyone who is a legal adult (18 in the US and 16 in most EU countries or parts of the world) they should have access to the resource. If they are legal adults who can make legal decisions, have full rights like almost any other citizen, and what not, then there is no reason to gatekeep such a resource.

Did he really say that about the PPH? That's surprising. I would think that he would be in support of everyone having access to it. Philip strikes me as a saint, we are in desperate need of more people like him if we ever want to see a pro-choice world. I agree with him that prisoners should be offered a peaceful death sentence as an alternative to prison time. People don't like to talk about it, but being locked up is grossly inhumane. It's easy to ignore the inhumanity of imprisonment when one considers how atrocious some crimes are. But the truth is that torturing criminals doesn't benefit anyone. They are locked up in order to keep the public safe, and that is obviously vital. But we only do so because we lack the knowledge and technology to fix their dysfunctional brains. In a perfect world, which currently we are too ignorant to manifest, there are no prisons.

Yes, this post is on point. As far as prisoners are concerned, yes, from an ethical and economical standpoint, it doesn't benefit us to just keep them locked up forever (we don't get anything useful from it), now yes, to lock them up forever to keep them from harming more innocent citizens is important like you said. As for a dignified death, yes I agree with prisoners having access to inert gases (not cyanide gas) and/or N would be much cheaper than locking them up for decades until their death and/or then keeping them in prison (hospice?) until they pass (which is also incredibly expensive as I've heard the last few months of one's life is the most expensive of all).

I don't agree with Nitshke, people should be held accountable for their actions and letting murderers get off scot-free via euthanasia is a awful proposal to me. The current system doesn't work though because it doesn't realistically benefit anyone but I'm against allowing them to get voluntary euthanasia, they should spend their lives creating clothes for the homeless or something along those lines.

I can see your reasoning and makes sense. But how about say, that they spend a certain amount of time in prison, like if the penalty for murder is a life sentence (which can be 20-30 years in prison), then they would need to first serve that sentence and once their 20-30 years have been served, then they are offered the optional of euthanasia. This is somewhat a mix/hybrid of punishment yet still saving taxpayer money too.

 

[EmbraceOfTheVoid]

I can see your reasoning and makes sense. But how about say, that they spend a certain amount of time in prison, like if the penalty for murder is a life sentence (which can be 20-30 years in prison), then they would need to first serve that sentence and once their 20-30 years have been served, then they are offered the optional of euthanasia. This is somewhat a mix/hybrid of punishment yet still saving taxpayer money too.

I'd be fine with that compromise but they should still use those years to be doing some kind of charity work.

 

[GoodPersonEffed]

So, Nitschke is demanding that the institutions, who irrationally insist on torture, rationally offer the option to end the torture with sanctioned assisted suicide. How about instead demanding that they stop torturing??

It feels like he's using the situation as a platform to push his agenda. It doesn't feel like the focus is on the well-being of the prisoners, but in fact shifts the focus from them to his goal of legal euthanasia. It's not about helping them, but helping further his goals by using them.

 

[IrRegularjoe]

So, Nitschke is demanding that the institutions, who irrationally insist on torture, rationally offer the option to end the torture with sanctioned assisted suicide. How about instead demanding that they stop torturing??

It feels like he's using the situation as a platform to push his agenda. It doesn't feel like the focus is on the well-being of the prisoners, but in fact shifts the focus from them to his goal of legal euthanasia. It's not about helping them, but helping further his goals by using them.

I got that impression as well. I'm not a huge fan of his. He doesn't have the compassion that Kevorkian had.

 

[GoodPersonEffed]

I got that impression as well. I'm not a huge fan of his. He doesn't have the compassion that Kevorkian had.

I'm not a fan either. I've made many criticisms of him. I think he's closer to P.T. Barnum than Kevorkian. And I hadn't thought about it before, but compassion is definitely something I don't sense from him.

 

[IrRegularjoe]

I'm not a fan either. I've made many criticisms of him. I think he's closer to P.T. Barnum than Kevorkian. And I hadn't thought about it before, but compassion is definitely something I don't sense from him.

Hahahaha PT Barnum.

 

[Incorrigible77777]

Strange. Pretty sure Exit supported euthanasia case of a 27 year old Canadian man who had mental illness.

Really? Is that in Pegasos or some other VAD institution? I wanna know more about this case. As for me the VAD institutions are also the top preferrence. I'm a 24-year-old Chinese man who's seriously mentally ill.

 

[IrRegularjoe]

Really? Is that in Pegasos or some other VAD institution? I wanna know more about this case. As for me the VAD institutions are also the top preferrence.

It was Adam Maier Clayton. He was Exits youngest member. And advocated for assisted dying for the mentally ill in Canada. He wasn't euthanized by an organization though. He bought Nembutal from China and drank it in a hotel room. He was from Windsor, Ontario. Canada.

 

[Incorrigible77777]

He was Exits youngest member.

I'm also planning to register for Exit. Does that mean I'll become the youngest member (aging 24)?

 

[IrRegularjoe]

I'm also planning to register for Exit. Does that mean I'll become the youngest member (aging 24)?

I don't know. It would depend on if they accepted you.

 

[Incorrigible77777]

I don't know. It would depend on if they accepted you.

Is Exit like as long as you finish application and pay fees you'll be admitted? I don't think you need to be approved like Pegasos, Lifecircle, Dignitas.

 

[IrRegularjoe]

No they have requirements to be a member. It's on their website. You have to be 50 or over. That's why Adam Maier Clayton was an exception. He advocated a lot. Talked to Phillip Nitshcke personally.

 

[Greenberg]

On this issue, I strongly disagree with Philip Nitschke.

Everyone ought to be accountable for their actions! If found guilty of a serious crime (i.e., homicide, rape, pedophilia, etc.), the loss of freedom is reasonable. Euthanasia is way too easy of a way out for criminality. There are reasons for prison time; it offers the felon the opportunity to suffer and reflect on the suffering they have caused to others. Perhaps, he/she can be rehabilitated; if not at the very least, an attempt was made.

I do want to mention that Dr. Nitschke is far too commercial, as he has employed compassionate publicity for personal financial gain. Frankly, I do not view him as a "true" medical doctor.

 

[Sarahlynn]

Is Exit like as long as you finish application and pay fees you'll be admitted? I don't think you need to be approved like Pegasos, Lifecircle, Dignitas.

I was denied, I'm in my 30's. They refunded the fee to me when I was denied.

 

[almost_dead]

omg !

 

[DyingAlf]

That doesn't make a lot of sense to me Brenton Tarrant is going to serve his sentence in a New Zealand prison.
Yes he will be deprived of his freedom (as he should be imo) but "torture" is pushing it.
He will be fed very well, watch tv on a decent screen, work out, etc etc all at the NZ taxpayers expense - that doesn't seem like torture to me.

I can see your reasoning and makes sense. But how about say, that they spend a certain amount of time in prison, like if the penalty for murder is a life sentence (which can be 20-30 years in prison), then they would need to first serve that sentence and once their 20-30 years have been served, then they are offered the optional of euthanasia. This is somewhat a mix/hybrid of punishment yet still saving taxpayer money too.

I like this idea.

 

[angie]

Did he really say that about the PPH? That's surprising. I would think that he would be in support of everyone having access to it. Philip strikes me as a saint, we are in desperate need of more people like him if we ever want to see a pro-choice world. I agree with him that prisoners should be offered a peaceful death sentence as an alternative to prison time. People don't like to talk about it, but being locked up is grossly inhumane. It's easy to ignore the inhumanity of imprisonment when one considers how atrocious some crimes are. But the truth is that torturing criminals doesn't benefit anyone. They are locked up in order to keep the public safe, and that is obviously vital. But we only do so because we lack the knowledge and technology to fix their dysfunctional brains. In a perfect world, which currently we are too ignorant to manifest, there are no prisons.

i agree the prisoners should be given the option .i know they have commited some absolutely terrible crimes ,but it surely cant give the victims families any comfort really .make them do at least 1 year hard prison time , then give them the choice .as long as they are in prison families will never truly move on knowing that person is still alive in jail. Also it will save countries a lot of money getting rid of them .

 

[Aap]

I may be completely wrong, but I suspect part of his 50/terminally ill requirement is pragmatically motivated. Most here would agree there is SOME age under which euthanasia should not be offered, and even this site has a requirement of being 18. He is trying to push for some form of legalization, and the restrictions he listed are more palatable than stating a perfectly healthy 15 or even 20 year old should have access to euthanasia for many people who might be inclined to support it. I'm stating a fact not a personal opinion.

likewise, I suspect he would have more legal pushback in Australia if his restrictions were more lenient. Jack kevorkian only assisted the very old and very ill. He was roundly condemned, but now some states have assisted dying laws now. His restrictions were far more stringent than Dr. N's and would be decried By many here today. On the same token, there may not be these laws if Dr. K assisted the very young in dying. This is a long game, and many of us are playing the very, very short game.

 

[Vault of Memories]

Can't really say I have any sympathy for either one of these people.

 

[Superdeterminist]

i agree the prisoners should be given the option .i know they have commited some absolutely terrible crimes ,but it surely cant give the victims families any comfort really .make them do at least 1 year hard prison time , then give them the choice .as long as they are in prison families will never truly move on knowing that person is still alive in jail. Also it will save countries a lot of money getting rid of them .

In my opinion, punishment has no place in an advanced society. The two rational reasons to imprison criminals are 1. To prevent them from committing more crime and 2. To deter other would-be criminals. The latter is a psychological justification for imprisonment, however its effectiveness is unclear; the existence of prisons clearly doesn't offer complete deterrence. Humans naturally have a strong sense of justice and desire for revenge, but this is purely emotional, and only causes more suffering. Punishing criminals and making them suffer "because they deserve it" doesn't undo the crime, doesn't fix the psychological issues that led their crime, and doesn't make sense in a world without free will (a contentious point - I argue there is none) . So, as it stands we must continue imprisoning criminals, because we have no better alternative, but only for that reason.

 

[Dreamless Sleep]

In my opinion, punishment has no place in an advanced society. The two rational reasons to imprison criminals are 1. To prevent them from committing more crime and 2. To deter other would-be criminals. The latter is a psychological justification for imprisonment, however its effectiveness is unclear; the existence of prisons clearly doesn't offer complete deterrence. Humans naturally have a strong sense of justice and desire for revenge, but this is purely emotional, and only causes more suffering. Punishing criminals and making them suffer "because they deserve it" doesn't undo the crime, doesn't fix the psychological issues that led their crime, and doesn't make sense in a world without free will (a contentious point - I argue there is none) . So, as it stands we must continue imprisoning criminals, because we have no better alternative, but only for that reason.

The current prison system in the US is very clearly NOT a deterrent to crime. It may be an archaic way to think... but I strongly believe we should be more hard on criminals.

3 hots and a cot + TV + internet + dirty letters from inmate fangirls + gym time to get buff and be a stronger bully if/when you get out is not my idea of punishment.

 

[airboy_a380]

Keep in mind it's the same guy that doesn't believe that you should have access to the PPH unless your terminally ill or over 50. Never shuts up about rational suicide. Yet his Twitter today was fucking stupid. Check it out.

So basically commit a crime and don't want a full time sentence is that it? If it is it's the most absurd thing I've heard.