Sorry; attempted suicide is illegal... but for intent & purposes it makes suicide illegal since it removes several options from you such as insurance etc. But no... they don't punish the family beyond normal end of life stuff such as having to deal with the remains; you might be charged for burning etc.

Ya sorry if that wasn't clear... I'm trying to make it a debate on that specific law & assuming a legal stance that would allow that specific law to be denied or retained. Court has to be able to enforce the result on the person(s).

(For me it's almost all green plants (un-green ones haven't been tested & spores & molds are minimal) & most animals.)

Now at what point does the change in lifestyle mean that one can argue they don't have much a life anyways?
A lot of the people in these towns life there for a couple reasons... tradition, the work involved (what work there is is usually quite better paying because of the remoteness), inability to move or in a couple of cases drugs. (It's in the news right now where one town has an emergency situation because of it's teenagers taking drugs & committing suicide. I can provide links if you wish to read about that case).
For me I prefer towns where it's: a) hilly with grass lands & trees; despite allergies I actually enjoy hiking, b) few thousand people c) some amenities such as at least 2 gas stations that are open past 5 p.pm. d) a few public spaces such as the library or a mall... even a small 12 shop one.
Current city/town is ~60,000 people. Considered smallish by some people but move 40 kms in any direction except South & you'll be fairly secluded.
I'd argue that forcing me to move to a place like resolute bay would be inhumane; it'd leave my mental state as feeling stranded & outcast.

A Kobo is Chapters bookstore's answers to the Kindle. However it's more open source friendly than the Kindle.
It's primary format is DRM free epub (to the point where the store sells them as DRM free), has a 12 gray scale screen for most of them, screen is perl e-ink. Supports "normal text" (since epubs are just html right?), PDFs & I think jpeg formats.


---Edit---
Oh... I'm also purposely trying to be a bit stubborn; I'm trying to make it a debate to see if one side can be swayed as if we were on debate teams. :-p I'm in it for the mental exercise of it & as long as people don't mind will quite happily move back & forth between both for and against.

Oh, ok. I thought that was a weird law. I was actually kind of wondering what exactly had to happen for it to be put in place....
In theory, you could move for a limited period of time, say every X amount of months for X time period, in order to get temporary relief. With the job with more pay, you could possibly afford better medicine.

So you simply prefer to live in areas that activate your allergies? That might be a kind of hard one to convince the courts on, in that case.
"I want you to kill me because I refuse to move to a different area."

Stranded and outcast? Perhaps I misremember, but don't you have a family? They wouldn't come with you?
Plus, since you mentioned there are others, I'm sure that you would make at least one or two friends out of your neighbors.
So a....Linux e-book? With 43% more Canadian-ness? Gotcha.
Go for it. I love debates like this as well. Heck, if you want to bring up any such subject for this purpose, my chat's open 24/7. I'll debate just about anything, and can take whatever side you like.

A woman who wanted to terminate her life took the government (now voted out of office since last year) to the supreme court over not being allowed to let herself be terminated while in the hospital.

It was decided that the parts of the criminal code disallowing attempted suicide were unconstitutional & the judge came back with the ruling the the government must come up with laws governing assisted suicide with in one year; however since the election the new government has asked for an extension to further examine the laws & conditions involved.

Part of the criminal code struck down:
"
Suicide
Counselling or aiding suicide
241. Every one who
(a) counsels a person to commit suicide, or
(b) aids or abets a person to commit suicide,
whether suicide ensues or not, is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years.
"
The judge in question came back with assisted suicide being legal under the conditions of "a grievous and irremediable medical condition (including an illness, disease or disability) that causes enduring suffering that is intolerable to the individual in the circumstances of his or her condition” (irremediable means that the condition cannot be alleviated by means acceptable to the person)."

However, to my knowledge, there are no actual laws governing it yet but to my understanding you must have a court order to allow your doctor to carry out the assistance or he is terminating your life illegally.
How he or she may be braking the law has not been tested as of yet.

Also to my knowledge the woman who opened the case died last year in what she considered irremediable pain.
Last I heard was her daughter on the is taking the government to court to further change the laws.

The argument I find interesting is that allergies, essentially an untreatable disease or condition that is only treated symptomatically, can be grounds to seek that assistance.

Really, this is the only way in which I can see the law, in a practical sense, taking effect. You'd have to be in a condition in which you are physically incapable of taking your own life, which, assuming you are not currently in such a condition that you're ALREADY physically dying, you would not be with allergies.
...of course, this sort of action would not be encouraged in any sense of the word, but I'm just pointing out the way the court could see it.

I can't afford to move that often. For an individual like myself there is no trained work to be had & instead would suffer a loss in wages because the resulting work would be menial
My work (I'm actually trained in computer stuff) depends on large centers; the larger the better.
A small town such as that exampled contains minimal communication opportunities & instead rely on more physical jobs such as transportation, hunting & providing of food or supplying of fuel or goods to others near by.

Counter argument:
"I was born in the town I now live; it would be cruel to make me leave the area I have become accustomed to where it's almost as if you're confining me to a cell. I have broken no laws & taken reasonable & affordable steps to
mediate the condition. The condition is still causing excessive discomfort & show no signs of alleviating. To me this define irremediable."

(In my case despite the anti-allergens I've had flu like symptoms for the last 4 days however I will be taking additional steps tomorrow I hope based on $$... I actually do have a couple other pills I can be taking I just keep forgetting to see if medical can pay for them right now.)

My significant other would likely choose to make that relocation yes; however my other family members most likely could not (too remote) & not sure I'd want my parents there anyways. :-p Extended family would probably just make it a point to call once a week.

Well the firmware is probably linux kernel with busybox or something but I haven't actually checked.
Chapters is also American but supports Canada a bit more than Amazon ya. :-p

Cool... I put it in the general chat thread because I'm interested in seeing what arguments various people with various back grounds make on either side.
She wanted to do it in a "nice" manner with her family's support & with in the law.
She was fully capable of taking her own life however she chose not to & instead sought a law that would give her support.
The law doesn't actually state you MUST be dying merely that it is "a grievous and irremediable medical condition".
It was already established within our law that this does not mean terminal. Grievous is open to debate here.
Allergies for instance can: reduced chances of finding a life long mate, cause temporary blindness (eyes swollen shut), cause physical distress in the form of being unable to breath, cause pain (in my case I also have eczema & have had periods where I cannot resist scratching that it's gotten to the point of causing myself to bleed from scratching the skin off), excessive tiredness due to the physical energy expended (such as violent prolonged sneezing).

---Edit---
Basically it's been established that the wording is very specific here. The judge must consider non-physical conditions such as mental states such as depression as potentially grievous& that a lot of personal preferences comes into it since "irremediable means that the condition cannot be alleviated by means acceptable to the person".
The judge cannot throw the law but only decide on a specific case; in this case allergies being so horrendous that the person would prefer death to suffering symptoms everyday & that the person is in their right mind to make this choice; not being forced by any outside circumstance such as someone telling them they'd be better off dead. Lack of money is not something the judge can consider since the judge can't really force anyone else to give the person a job. Otherwise we wouldn't have homeless people.

In that case, maybe they could attempt to relocate you to another indoors location away from your current source of allergens.
The question then would be whether it makes life unlivable, such as to the point where you can no longer find enjoyment in anything.

Wait...what happened to Canda's famous free healthcare? Do you mean that the theory that Wolverine's insane regeneration ability isn't a nod at Canada's health system since he's a Canadian superhero?! o_O
She might start that "assisted suicide" FOR you if you tell her that being alone with her leaves you "stranded".
*snicker*
Meh. I prefer physical books.
Well, in that case, I might want to back down a bit, seeing as I could probably go on all day when I see a nice debate. Might be nice of me to give others a chance to talk.

Well, I imagine it comes down to just that: The definition of "grievous medical condition", which I'm sure if presented before our Supreme Court, would be as hotly debate of a term as "free speech" or "cruel and unusual punishment". I don't know how Canada's medical system, but it would probably come down to the individual interpretation of the judges. And my guess is that they'd try to take into account what steps are available in order to assure that a doctor doesn't have to kill somebody.

This comes down to basically my financial status; I can't afford to be a "bubble boy".
Judge can't order it.

Against that argument yes; I'm arguing that one might actually not feel like life is worth living. The judge's point of view must be within the confines of the general public agreement. (I.e. if he summoned a grand jury what would the grand jury decide while remaining with in the law?).
I'm stating that life will be unbearable; therefore grant me my order for assisted suicide. I will not be dissuaded. How can you, as opposition, convince a 3rd party that my life will be worth living as viewed by the general public? At what point can my feeling that life sucks in such a town be overruled? I won't kill myself but I won't be myself if subjected to such a locale.


My medical is about 80% coverage. Very good... however it means my ventolin is $1.40 a canister but some of the other stuff I can take is about $40. Uncovered it's something like $410.

Argument is that the significant other won't be able to stay with me all the time if we're to maintain a living at all.
But ya that might happen. :-p

Oh I don't mind.... I'm seeing if your stance can be weakened or changed at all. If it does change then I'll change to the opposing side.
Exactly right.
So you're saying now that allergies are a just cause to seek assisted suicide?

Little more than 6 hours to go, then I can see if GOG is finally starting the fucking summer sale...

Still, if you're at this level of insane, intolerable discomfort, wouldn't the chances be that you've already just jumped off a bridge or something?
Only 80%? They told us it was free!
LIES! THEY LIED TO US! THEY ALL LIED!!!!!
*sudden emotional music*
It could. I'm curious what arguments you're going to come up with.
Only if the case were extreme and enough to impair you and make you suffer enough that you're literally unable to function from the pain.
The thing is, it's possible to die of an allergic reaction, so would one assume that if you were at this point, you'd already be dead or in danger of dying.

Good morning everyone, not sure how I feel about jumping into this conversation.
So I won't.

*chants*
Do it! Do it! Do it! Do it!

About time right?

Same reason the woman who had the law changed didn't take her own life; desire to die in a comfortable caring environment with support of family, friends & community & not to be subjected to humiliation if their attempt at breaking a law of Canada failed. Also to have a guarantee that their life would end & not have the chance to fail in terminating their life & be in pain if something went wrong such as being crippled & to further not risk their relatives facing repercussions if it was deemed that they assisted in any manor. (Which as I posted earlier could result in a lengthy jail term.) And to stay with in the law as well.
I mean anyone could argue "I'll just go my brains out" but that's not what I was getting at; I'm trying to get that something a lot of people wouldn't consider serious should be considered serious by the law & be dealt with in a very irreversible way that some of the community may not agree with.

Well my medication & dental is only 80%.
I can walk into any hospital & not have to pay for standard care, never have to pay my doctor for appointments, there's no paying to have a subscription written but you must visit the doctor to have it written; that's how they get paid.
There are other charges such as if you miss a doctor's appointment they can charge you a fee for that & I think if you stay in the hospital beyond the doctor's diagnosis they can charge you for that as well. That one I have to confirm though.
Also dental covers non-optional things only such as white fillings are 80%; gold would be completely paid for by medical. Night guards, unless ordered by a doctor, are not covered etc.
Medicines are only 80% for "critical" things.... what's "critical" keeps changing every month it seems however.
Law also requires you have medical. If you aren't provided with medical through your work place you MUST enroll in the provincial medical plan which is crap & expensive. It operates as a kind of insurance pool but what it covers is slim & most of what it covers is 40% I believe. Doctors appointments & hospital stays are still paid for however.

Good morning everybody ! :)
**Hugs, waves, nothing to drink yet**
Hope you enjoyed your weekend...
So... sale, or not sale... :-)