This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
The problem that I don’t see addressed by pro-euthanasia advocates is how exactly do you prevent the perverse incentives that remove the free choice of the individual? How do you make sure that insurance companies don’t instantly refuse to pay for surgeries or pain treatments or even medical equipment when an elderly person reaches the age where she’s eligible for euthanasia? How do you keep the family from talking advantage of early stages of dementia to convince their granny to choose euthanasia so they can inherit her money? The potential for those kinds of things would be pretty strong — a lot of money is spend on care in the last five or so years of life, which can mean that for insurance, ending the life 7 years early is a substantial cost savings. For the family, they’d get a bigger inheritance as you aren’t using those funds for the purpose of keeping granny alive. Governments can also save on accommodations in some cases.
What I see here is a very vulnerable population with a lot of people poised to get (or keep) lots of money by convincing that person to choose euthanasia even if it’s not what that person really wants, or if that person has less mental capacity.
One solution is different medical insurances available according to your preferred end of life care. Governments can be totally agnostic about the issue and keep away from medical care entirely, or they can run their own optional buy-in government-run healthcare. But if there develops a culture that says “actually we are fine with dying before things go terrible”, then the members of that culture should never be taxed for the costly end of life care of the rest of the population, and they should be allowed to engage in euthanasia as they please (above a certain age) provided there is consent of the member. As for,
Perhaps a requirement that they agreed to this eventuality at an earlier healthy date a certain number of years prior. Sort of like a Do Not Resuscitate.
More options
Context Copy link
The set of examples coming out of Canada has been sobering, especially as someone who was loosely in favor of allowing voluntary euthanasia previously.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link