From: Michael Roy Ames (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sun Oct 20 2002 - 11:00:05 MDT
Your opinion, that I have a "duty to others" to go on living, is anathema to me.
I will defend my "right to die" down to my last partical of resource. Not
because I particularly want to die, but because I reject the idea that the
collective posseses the moral authority to determine my future. I can and will
determine my own future, thank you very much! I have no duties to others,
except those duties that I admit/take-on/assume. I do not acknowledge duties
that are imposed upon me as having any moral weight whatsoever.
I also 'just want to make it clear' that to *impose* a duty to continue living
is a clear violation of volition, and, as such, a very unFriendly action.
That said, I do understand where you're coming from. In a society where
scarcity is the rule, the question of an individual's continued existence or
termination is non-trivially relavent to the group. Resources are still scarce
IMO, but not as scarce as they once were, for many. Certainly not scarce enough
that you or I offing ourselves is going to make any difference to anything. In
a society of abundance, the self-termination of an individual will not effect
the group's ability to survive to any meaninful extent. It is time to re-write
that part of the EP programming.
Michael Roy Ames
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:41 MDT