[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Well that's entirely subjective... Maybe the cowards way out is a more attractive prospect than a lifetime of torment based on your murderous past?
Maybe the victims families too would rather he have the chance to reflect, and not have the choice to end his sentence.

You could apply that fuzzy logic to many criminally insane though, he will be controlled with medication. The 'savings to the state' really has no place in an ethical debate either, being purely an economic consideration.

1) Your comments are redundant because I have already covered the points you are making. I always state my case as fully as I can and always expound just why I state what I do, no matter how long such a practice may take me because I believe that serious issues cannot be discussed in a few short comments.

This being so, I have explained my reasons in full why I think he should be allowed to die, and just why I do not believe he is seeking a 'cowards way out'. Read my posts and you'll see.

2) You really should read through your own posts before critising me for 'fuzzy logic".

3) This is not a thread confined specifically to 'ethics'. No one specified so in the original post, and I used the economic factor as just one small part of my case.