tightloop Posted February 22, 2005 Share Posted February 22, 2005 Anyone who takes their own life takes the cowards way out...regardless of his accomplishments in journalism....just my opinion...and yes, this includes Hemmingway and others... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Singlestack Posted February 22, 2005 Share Posted February 22, 2005 Tightloop, Perhaps that is an opinion that just might be better left unsaid....just my opinion....in public anyway. Its obvious that neither you or I understand suicide, and I think thats pretty normal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Di Vita Posted February 22, 2005 Share Posted February 22, 2005 I don't really think that opinion would bother anyone....unless someone was dense enough to actually defend suicide in which case I don't really care if they are offended or not. Just my humble opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D.Hayden Posted February 22, 2005 Share Posted February 22, 2005 A like remark was removed (by a moderator?) from the other Hunter post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tightloop Posted February 22, 2005 Author Share Posted February 22, 2005 Well, I certainly don't want to offend anyone.....and you are correct, I do not understand the mindset of anyone who might consider that option.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Di Vita Posted February 22, 2005 Share Posted February 22, 2005 BE, I'm not sure I understand how someone's life mission can be completed if they are still alive? Isn't the meaning of "life" mission that it takes a lifetime to achieve? If someone believes they have achieved it already maybe they weren't correct about what their life mission truly was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shred Posted February 22, 2005 Share Posted February 22, 2005 A like remark was removed (by a moderator?) from the other Hunter post. Yes, they were... But since "they" haven't gotten to this thread yet... FWIW, this thread is not in the memorial section Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carmoney Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 That was my comment on the other HST post that Flex removed. It was nothing particularly profound, just briefly pointed out my views on suicide (one word, actually) when I felt that another member's post sounded a bit too much like it was glorifying suicide. On reflection, though, I understood why my comment got pulled from the memorial board, and ultimately I agree with Flex's decision (and the very reasonable way he handled it with me afterward). I might have been a bit sensitive to the topic of suicide this week, because a sophomore girl at the local high school killed herself, for reasons no one seems to understand. My kids didn't know her, but everyone was in an emotional uproar about it anyway, understandably. Her obit ran the same day HST died--she was 15 years old, blonde, beautiful, in the talented and gifted program at school, top of her class in grades......and now she's dead. It's very sad, and terribly frightening for a parent of teenagers to think about. By coincidence I just finished re-reading HST's "Hell's Angels" book last week. I always thought he was a pretty interesting character (although I view his "gonzo" journalism as the beginning of the end of objective media reporting, which I think has been a real detriment to us all). Regardless, I must say I'm wholly disappointed in what he chose to be his final act, and regardless of why he did it I hope nobody ever looks at his decision as "taking control" or "dying with dignity" or anything else remotely positive. Suicide is an act of hostility toward those who are left behind. It should never be accepted or glorified. Or so it seems to me. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 Shame on you TL! Just where do you get off disparaging the entire institution of suicide? BTW, doesn't it seem a little odd that as a society, we have begun to discuss suicide as though it were some sort of legitimate career choice? I mean...com'mon....it's..... suicide! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tightloop Posted February 23, 2005 Author Share Posted February 23, 2005 Sam Blame it on my mom...she raised me that way Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AikiDale Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 I was raised to believe suicide was not an option. That said, I have observed several types of suicide; 1. "I'm miserable so I'm out of here" seems to be the most prevelant and saddest. 2. "Your're going down and if I have to go to then so be it" Mission oriented kamikaze/terrorist types are just plain dangerous. 3. Throw yourself on the grenade to save your buddies. We call them heros, or saviours. "Greater love has no man..." 4. You have been sentenced to die, but you can do it yourself. From Socrates to feudal age Samurai. In the right cultural setting it's an honorable form. I am not convinced they are all wrong any more than I am convinced any are right, but two or three might be a "legitimate career choice?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiG Lady Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 People who are not genuinely suffering from a terrible, painful, incurable disease (or something similarly hopeless and disabling) do not, IMHO, have the right to off themselves at a whim. Every ten years or so we find a new damn' trendy ailment to saddle ourselves with and feel sorry about... a few years back it was dyslexia and ADD; before that it was something else; now it's "depression". Aside from the small percentage of legitimate cases that require serious bio-chemical adjustments to relieve a serious imbalance, most of us just need a boot in the ass by a couple of good friends and a hefty dose of fricking ToughLove. All this business of pills for this and pills for that is tiresome and merely supports big pharm-chem businesses. Most people eating pills in the 20th and 21st century don't need them. Dependency is not an option if you want to be truly healthy. Life is not easy, folks!! Where did you ever get the idea it was??!! Every day is a monstrous challenge and we have to deal with it. Have to deal with it. Be responsible for your life. Unless you have a legitimate ailment, don't lean on pills and outside substances to do your work for you! For god's sake, if you REALLY want to do some good for society, set an example for others with strong, responsible behavior that radiates confidence. Confidence is built from WITHIN and it's not that difficult, and your confidence is--in reality--a great gift to others. Ramp up your confidence and thoughts of suicide will never enter the picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ima45dv8 Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 Sounds like a Post-of-the-Month contender to me. Well said, SL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiG Lady Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 Confidence saves lives. Although I'll be the first to admit that my confidence level depends heavily on how well I'm shooting any given week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AikiDale Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 Although I'll be the first to admit that my confidence level depends heavily on how well I'm shooting any given week. [/color] That helps, but I find I do much better when the sun is shining. I am getting really tired of grey sky, cold and rain. Fortunately the sun is supposed to be out Saturday for the steel match! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benos Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 BE,I'm not sure I understand how someone's life mission can be completed if they are still alive? Isn't the meaning of "life" mission that it takes a lifetime to achieve? If someone believes they have achieved it already maybe they weren't correct about what their life mission truly was. Jake, My post was "accidentally" deleted by a moderator, and I'm in such a pissy mood today that I don't feel like reposting it. My (deleted) post wasn't appropriate or complete anyway... but to go back to a bit of it... Can I say if the zen master's announcement of the end of his life (example) was "suicide," or did he just know that it was his time to die? No, I can't, so that wasn't a good example. I do think it's interesting, however, that those of us who probably can't even begin to imagine a "suicidal" person's mental state - whether due to a terminal illness, a failed relationship, a self-inflicted mental state of some sort, or any other reason - somehow think we know that choosing to end one's own life is either "right" or "wrong." That somehow what we think is right should apply to someone else. be Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 That somehow what we think is right should apply to someone else That is definitely the worlds most enduring and alluring fallacy. -- Regards, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pisgahrifle Posted February 24, 2005 Share Posted February 24, 2005 Thompson made his own decision. It was, as it should be, his to make. The supreme irony of this discussion is that it is taking place in a room in which (one should safely assume) many folk strongly support the right to bear arms. one can also assume that these same folk support the remainder of the Bill of Rights equally as well as the earlier enunciations of the Bill's basic premises in the Declaration of Independence. Let us assume, then, that the goal of citizenship in the Republic is, essentially, to partake in the blessings of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, at least until the point where that pursuit is a detriment to the life, liberty or happiness of another. Suicide is a choice that the individual undertakes, and if he or she does no harm to another in the process, so be it. To say that the act itself harms those left behind is true to a point- the actor in this case is still a free being, and is not owned by those left behind. Thus if the individual, for whatever reason, chooses this path, is it right that they should suffer along if only for the emotive satisfaction of others? Who, then, is comitting the more selfish act? Liberty is not easy. If we are to accept the concept, then we accept that we choose our own path in life and make our own decisions. I do not make decisions for another- it is not within my natural rights as a human being to do so. Not only this, but as a citizen of this Republic I know that it is most certainly not my place to decide what actions another citizen make nor may I pass judgement on anyone who has done no harm to me. Whether spiritual or secular, the rights on which Hunter Thompson made his decision are affirmed not only in the rights of man but in the very fabric of the Nation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Posted February 24, 2005 Share Posted February 24, 2005 It's the discussions like this one that really make this forum rock! The intellects of the posters here are tremendous. Awesome post Siggy! And everone else too. Sometimes I wonder if the purpose of this physical existence is simply to transcend this physical existence. Consider if you will, that without silence there could be no sound. And without darkness, no light. Without space, no individual objects. Maybe the physical mechanics only exist so that the spirit can be brought into clear focus by the existence of its contrasting opposite? Did we bring ourselves into this world? Did our hearts begin to beat within our mothers wombs by an act of our own sheer will? If we truly are totally in charge, why all the guns and ropes, knives and poisions? Why can't we just will our own hearts to stop beating? We're all going to experience a physical death. All in good time....... All in good time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiG Lady Posted February 24, 2005 Share Posted February 24, 2005 ..."the purpose of this physical existence is simply to transcend this physical existence." Now we're staring at the mother lode with that remark... Couple of other quotes: "The purpose of living is to discover the purpose of living." "We are not here to suffer; we're here to figure out how NOT to suffer!" The keyword truly is transcend......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AikiDale Posted February 24, 2005 Share Posted February 24, 2005 If we can get past needing a meaning of life; if we can get past requiring a purpose to life, then we can be about manifesting our lives. Life is and we are. That is more than complicated enough. "We" do not "have" a life. "We" do not "own" a life. Life is not a thing to be possesed. Life is way cool. Probably the neatest phenomena going and "We" are lucky enough to be part of it. That is just too cool to not enjoy it. YMMV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted February 24, 2005 Share Posted February 24, 2005 It's an incredible act of arrogance to believe we have the right to condemn another person's choice to end their life. I've read a bit on the topic of suicide, it's really quite fascinating. There's a concept called a "balance suicide," in which a person in complete possession of their faculties looks over their life and makes a rational, objective decision: "I'd be better off dead." We tend to see this most with people who have a degenerative, extremely painful disease (Hemingway is the classic example) where all they have to look forward to if they live is continuing, constantly increasing, and degrading physical pain. This is a WAY different matter than a 16-year old kid who breaks up with his bimbo girlfriend and decides, "I can't go on! It's all over!" and kills himself. I remember years ago reading an article by M. Scott Peck, the author best known for writing the self-help manual The Road Less Travelled, in which he blasted those who chose suicide, specifically people with incurable and painful diseases, as being moral cowards who were robbing themselves of the spiritual growth they could experience if they lived through the pain to their deaths. I was struck at the time by the amazing arrogance of the man - but not particularly surprised. If you read The Road Less Travelled, Peck several times describes what he considers the levels of spiritual growth an individual can experience, the highest of which is one who's achieved such an advanced level of spiritual insight s/he realizes s/he has a responsibility to share those insights with others. And there's NO doubt Peck considers himself in that category. Thing is, reading his work, I am forced to the conclusion that Peck is one strange ranger who's not nearly as advanced as he thinks he is. For instance, he explains his decision to switch from Buddhism back to Christianity as his preferred religion by saying, "Over time I found myself profoundly distrustful of a religion that can explain everything." Sounds like a good reason to prefer a religion to me! And in People of the Lie, a sequel to The Road Less Travelled, Peck, with absolutely no irony, suggests that DSM III, the manual of psychological diseases, be amended to include demonic possession as a mental disease. Understand, he's not saying that people who believe they're demonically possessed are nuts, he's saying that psychologists should have procedures in place to deal with people who are honest to God (pun intended) possessed by demons. (Cue theme from The Twilight Zone.) The instance that sticks with me the most as an example of Scott Peck not being the highly advanced superman he obviously thinks he is was the story he told about playing chess with his daughter. Seems his daughter loved playing chess with her father. But it was so important to Peck to play his absolute best he'd take forever considering his next move....despite the fact his daughter would always become increasingly upset as time wore on and it became obvious she wouldn't be able to get enough sleep to be able to function in school the next day. "Can't you hurry up, Daddy?" Nope, ol' Scott had to play his best game. And every time, the game would end unfinished when his daughter, in tears, finally said to hell with it and went to bed. And he just couldn't understand why she was so upset. Over time, the 40-watter finally popped and Peck realized (and isn't this impressive) that his daughter only wanted to spend time with him, doing something they both enjoyed, with a father who wasn't so godawfully self-centered and selfish he didn't give a damn whether he kept her up way past her bedtime, to the point she'd be physically exhausted the next day, doing it. "And so," he crows, "I now allow myself to play chess with my daughter faster and less carefully." And he's just about throwing his shoulder out of joint, patting himself on the back for his advanced level of spiritual development and emotional sensitivity. Problem is, what he's talking about is simply basic common courtesy, the sort of thing anyone with two emotionally functional brain cells to rub together would do as a matter of course. This is the sort of arrogance that believes it has the right to judge another person's decision whether to live or die. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigDave Posted February 24, 2005 Share Posted February 24, 2005 Years ago I had the same outlook as Carmoney's deleted response to my original post about HST's passing. But, over the last two years, and certainly the past couple of days my opinion has changed. I've arrived at the conclusion that I've never reached either the (1) level of mental anguish or (2)self-realization that people who take that step have. Strange birds we are, humans. It is okay to kill one another and other animals. It's even okay to put animals and pets down to "end their suffering". But it isn't okay to put an end to our own life when we want to, on our own terms? That logic no longer washes for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Posted February 24, 2005 Share Posted February 24, 2005 "We" do not "have" a life. "We" do not "own" a life. Life is not a thing to be possesed. Life is way cool. Yeah! That's what I'm talking about! Akai, what does it mean? YMMV? Great point about arrogance, Duane. It is indeed arrogant of us to judge others choices. Could arrogance also be the driving force behind the belief that "It's my life and my choice"? I wonder about this since I am at times, greatly arrogant. (as well as ignorant) At my core, I really don't want to control anything. I just want to ride and go WOW, this is so cool! But "fear and loathing" is constantly being created by my own mind as it battles with my soul for control of my true existence. That is why I so love being "in the zone". No conflict exists for me there. See you in the zone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tightloop Posted February 24, 2005 Author Share Posted February 24, 2005 If we really believe in God's teachings and that God is the Way, the Truth and the Life, and commit our presence to doing God's will while we are here on earth, how can we as one of God's creatures assume we have the knowledge and forsight to understand when God is finished with us doing his work and take our own life... Talk about gross arrogance...to even begin to think we understand better what we need, more than our Father in Heaven.. No, he did not make us all the same with the same gifts to offer, but snuffing out our own light without considering what the impact on our fellow humans might be after we are gone, and without getting the greenlight from the Big Guy above, seems to me, to be the ultimate slap in the face...saying in effect that our feelings, love and interaction do not matter and that the person also says that he has given up on God to direct his life and that he now thinks that he knows more about what to do with his life than God the Father... And that folks is supreme BS.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now