🚀 go-pugleaf

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

                Newsgroups:  talk.euthanasia, aus.general, aus.politics
                Followup-to: talk.euthanasia, aus.politics

In article <5gtcmr$m3n$1@euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au>,
d-moss@adfa.oz.au (David Moss) wrote:
>look@my.sig (Geoff) wrote:
[snip]
>I believe 'right' equals 'can not be given up or assigned'.
>For instance I have a right to free speech, yet I can choose to remain
>silent. That doesn't mean someone else has the right to prevent me
>speaking should I change my mind.

Nor can you be forced to speak, except in very limited circumstances
in which basic rights of others are at stake.  Ypur right is violated
by someone who appoints himself to speak in your stead without your 
express permission.  However, you certainly do have the right to 
appoint a willing person to act as your spokesperson.  You lose no 
part of your right by exercising it through an assistant who is under 
your control.

>Similarly I have a right to life. I can choose to deprive myself of
>life voluntarily, but no-one else has the right to kill me because

Here is where you most persistently use deceptive rhetoric to
manipulate the discussion.  No one may *deprive you* of what is
rightfully yours to govern, including your life.  That, however,
bears no relation to VE or PAS at all.  VE/PAS specifies right up
front that it is the *voluntary* act of a patient, who may exercise
his right over his own life by ending it.  VE/PAS specifies the
conditions by which the patient can exercise that right through the 
assistance of a physician who is acting under the patient's control.

>that  act would deprive me of any further opportunity to exercise  my
>inalienable right to life.

>>I guess your next trick will be to force an end to volunteer work,

A more pointed, and direct, analogy might be surgery.  After all, no
has a 'right' to slice your body open, even a doctor. It's just as
gross a misrepresentation to phrase the doctor's role in surgery that
way as it is to label VE a 'right to kill.'  If Moss were even 
remotely consistent, he would demand that surgery be banned (unless it's 
self-performed, of course).  That would be equally as justifiable as
depriving me of my right to obtain assistance in ending my life in
the time and manner of my choice.

[snip]
>>Time you got the dictionary out. Start with 'morality' and then move
>>to 'consistent'.
>
>You are beginning to resemble  Rip Van Winkle, Geoff.
>You have been asleep on this issue for so long you have forgotten who
>posts checkable facts, and who makes things up as they go along.

As you've said, David, you're only really concerned that what you
post has the right spin.  

[snip]
- -- 
Frank Weaver                                       Encrypted email preferred
weaver1@world.std.com                              PGP KeyID: 0AAE84B
                                                   On a keyserver near you
                         Blessed is the Water of Life,
            by the grace of the holy trinity: yeast, malt and hops

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBM0GBCkJ1zIgKroS1AQHNFgP+JGCKH1Z1vIzPB5f5ZtFNd1y8/ouePfc9
of3p6Q9ldQm1ViSUrXziPc+DgTncEnc3vLmZgY73sSu1RiWrNA7NNfeuWrlA2hqK
V2kNVKS4MyFusrOSYfrLYLw1aQ9icJF2CMMu0IzT1BP07xoK7/grqYecdmI9aln6
3tCWTl3XAy8=
=HTR3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----