Sign in to follow this  
Kimmy

Should We Be Allowed To Intentionally Harm Ourselves?

  

64 members have voted

  1. 1. Should we be allowed to intentionally harm ourselves?

    • Yes. We should be able to do whatever we want to our bodies. This would include smoking, drinking, drugs, suicide, etc.
      33
    • Yes, with restrictions.
      14
    • No, with exceptions.
      5
    • No, under no circumstances should we be allowed to intentionally harm ourselves.
      5
    • Other: I will not confine myself to the limits of your poll!
      7
  2. 2. Does the same still apply if that person is pregnant?

    • Yes. Even a pregnant woman should be able to do whatever she wants with her body. This would include smoking, drinking, drugs, suicide, etc
      27
    • Yes, with restrictions.
      7
    • No, with exceptions.
      10
    • No, under no circumstances should we be allowed to intentionally harm ourselves.
      9
    • Other: I will not confine myself to the limits of your poll!
      11
  3. 3. Did your answers match each other?

    • Yes.
      44
    • No.
      12
    • I'm not telling!
      8


Recommended Posts

Note: I was inspired to make this poll after watching an episode of Law and Order: SVU the other night.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. We should be able to do whatever we want to our bodies. This would include smoking, drinking, drugs, suicide, etc.

Yes. Even a pregnant woman should be able to do whatever she wants with her body. This would include smoking, drinking, drugs, suicide, etc

Yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had "restrictions" in that whatever we do it should be within the confines of what is legally allowed so as not to encourage others to break laws.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, no restrictions

Yes, no restrictions

Yes

I may disagree with someones choices, but Im sure there are those who disagree with my choices in life too. I dont see why I should be able to force my views onto someone else unless I then consent to having others views forced onto me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, no restrictions to both. As long as they aren't physically harming anyone else (and IMHO, a fetus does NOT count), then they should be allowed to do whatever they want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do what you wish to yourself but if you are pregnant, you are no longer doing it to just yourself...A fetus does not count? I presume you haven't been around too many crack babies and children...

Edited by Samadhi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do what you wish to yourself but if you are pregnant, you are no longer doing it to just yourself...A fetus does not count? I presume you haven't been around too many crack babies and children...
Are you saying that in this day and age that a woman should give up some rights if she becomes pregnant?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

~ A person should be able to do what they want with their body & life as long as no others are harmed.

It may not be considered fair to some, but a pregnant woman damaging her body is also damaging another.

If a woman cannot or will not stop drinking or doing drugs then she shouldn't get pregnant. Ever.

Or if need be get an early abortion. But damaging another before they're even born is not right.

That's cruelty of an extremely selfish manner that's permanent harm to another.

A fetus does count in that it becomes a human damaged by being created in a cess-pool.

If a person wants total control over their own body & what they do with it, then they should take total responsibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If a woman cannot or will not stop drinking or doing drugs then she shouldn't get pregnant. Ever.
You just said that my wife should never have been born. I doubt it's what you meant to say, so I think maybe you haven't really thought this through.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Other.

Other.

Yes.

I reserve the right to decide whether I will interfere in someones acts of self destruction on a case by case basis. Some times people are meant to be hurt, other times they are meant to be saved. Some times we are meant to act, some times we are not.

There are no rules that can be made that will benefit all individuals. Even having no rules will not benefit all individuals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You just said that my wife should never have been born. I doubt it's what you meant to say, so I think maybe you haven't really thought this through.
~ I never said such a thing. I am very sorry that you read what I posted so.
~ A person should be able to do what they want with their body & life as long as no others are harmed.

It may not be considered fair to some, but a pregnant woman damaging her body is also damaging another.

If a woman cannot or will not stop drinking or doing drugs then she shouldn't get pregnant. Ever.

Or if need be get an early abortion. But damaging another before they're even born is not right.

That's cruelty of an extremely selfish manner that's permanent harm to another.

A fetus does count in that it becomes a human damaged by being created in a cess-pool.

If a person wants total control over their own body & what they do with it, then they should take total responsibility.

I don't see as how what I posted is offensive.

What, the abortion part? I said early abortion, which does happen every day way more often than it ought to!

Abortions shouldn't ever be needed or wanted as far as I'm concerned, birth-control should be better.

What, you trying to get me to apologise Doggy? I won't for that post. I do sympathize tho! :friends:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Note: I was inspired to make this poll after watching an episode of Law and Order: SVU the other night.

I could not answer the question. No matter how I looked at it, I could always foresee a line that was impossble to determine, legislate, enforce, justify or define.

For example, certain eating habits are harmful, as is putting one's self in harms way to save a child, as is sliding into second base, as is avoiding sleep to finish a project at work, as is the "no pain - no gain" philosophy of anerobic exercise, as is organ donation, as is many marriages, as is taking an unpopular stand, etc, etc...

This is why certain things are very hard to legislate or moralize. Just where do we draw the line? Who draws the line? Based on what?

It is a thought provoking thread/poll, however.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Chico that it's difficult, but I was able to cast my vote.

My rights end where another person's rights begin. I have the right to poison myself - with smoke, f'instance - but not to poison others.

There are absolute rights and non-absolute ones. The right to pleasure (non-absolute) is over-ridden by the right to health.

This will involve us all in messy and complicated line-drawing, not least in deciding when and where personhood begins.

But - that's life.

Justice is not easy, but it's still worth while.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
~ I never said such a thing.

You did. My wife's mother was (possibly still is) a street prostitute. She was (and possibly still is) a drug addict. She was unwilling or unable to stop using. For my wife to be born required her to get pregnant. You said that she shouldn't get pregnant, thus that my wife should not have been born. I am not trying to get you to apologize, nor am I saying that your words are offensive. I just think it bears pointing out that a pregnancy can be a good thing, even if it is surrounded by bad things, and you don't make the world better by getting rid of the good things just because they are surrounded by bad things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doggie, your wife may have been one of the few "lucky" ones that was not severely adversely affected by thier mother's drug use during pregancy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no way to not allow one from privately harming themself intentionally.

In my state they shoot and kill people who threaten to shoot and kill themselves.

Not everyone intentionally harming themselves knows what they are doing.

Sometimes insanity overrides pain.

Sometimes pain overrides sanity.

Sometimes fear overrides all.

Edited by Torpedo Vegas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
~ A person should be able to do what they want with their body & life as long as no others are harmed.

It may not be considered fair to some, but a pregnant woman damaging her body is also damaging another.

If a woman cannot or will not stop drinking or doing drugs then she shouldn't get pregnant. Ever.

Or if need be get an early abortion. But damaging another before they're even born is not right.

That's cruelty of an extremely selfish manner that's permanent harm to another.

A fetus does count in that it becomes a human damaged by being created in a cess-pool.

If a person wants total control over their own body & what they do with it, then they should take total responsibility.

Are you saying that to avoid possible harm to a fetus that it is better to just kill it? Possible harm vs death seems a little harsh. If you are going to say that a she would be "damaging another", does that not mean that the "another" is a person? If she has an addiction that she cannot control she should be allowed , or even encouraged, to kill another to avoid a possibility of harm later?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You did. My wife's mother was (possibly still is) a street prostitute. She was (and possibly still is) a drug addict. She was unwilling or unable to stop using. For my wife to be born required her to get pregnant. You said that she shouldn't get pregnant, thus that my wife should not have been born. I am not trying to get you to apologize, nor am I saying that your words are offensive. I just think it bears pointing out that a pregnancy can be a good thing, even if it is surrounded by bad things, and you don't make the world better by getting rid of the good things just because they are surrounded by bad things.

I cannot speak for Claire, but MAYBE she was referring to the potential/likely permanent damage that the drugs/alcohol use could do to the unborn child

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this