It really sucks that it isn't clear what the exact law is that's being debated.
Is it decriminalization of suicide, is it legalization of assisted suicide and/or euthanasia, is it lowering the requirements that need to be met before someone may be euthanized?
We don't know and that makes it all the harder to evaluate the debate.
I'm going to assume the legalization of assisted suicide for now, because this seems to be the most extreme but still realistic position to have. And I guess this would face major position from a population that's more traditional.
I heard about the debate and that's what initially attracted me to this anime. But after this, I can only say that I'm disappointed.
The strongest argument against the law was the economic argument, but the guy barely elaborated.
I don't think I get the second argument that well. Suicide is obviously against moral rules. But why?
Plus he says something about societal collapse. I'm assuming he means that a loot more people would choose suicide.
But that's not the case. Out of the 6 countries where assisted suicide is legal, only Switzerland and Belgium have suicide rates higher than the global mean, and both are still lower than Japan.
I guess I could imagine an increase in suicides when assisted suicide becomes legal, but it wouldn't be that much. Maybe a few more per 100k people. I don't think the legality of suicide, assisted or not, matters all that much in how much it actually happens.
But then again, I also see where he's coming from, because the show mentions that suicides have increased 2.8x.
I kinda get where the 3th guy was coming from, but we don't know what it means when Shiniki's and Japan's laws conflict. Does Japanese law thriumph when it's conflicting, like it does for federal and state law in USA? We don't know, they haven't made that clear yet, so I don't know if I'd count this as a good argument.
Also, it's pretty ridiculous to suggest that the whole population would be under violation of whatever law that says that assisted suicide is illegal.
I don't get the last one. This is also the one that kinda indicates that it's not merely an assisted suicide law, but it could also be that he's just a very old and traditional geezer.
Now onto Itzuki's arguments.
Suicide wouldn't be running away but a choice, and because of that, it might actually decrease?!?!? WUT. I don't get the first half, and the second half is blatantly false, because the show mentions a 2.8x increase.
His second argument is where he compares the decriminalization and/or legalization of weed with suicide. I kinda like that one. I don't know if this is true irl, but I'll assume so for now. There is still the point that weed usage might depend a lot more on other factors besides the legality of it, and the point that suicide and drug use are very different things and shouldn't be compared that way.
His argument on laws and societal values changing over time is spot on.
His point on de-stigmatizing suicide is ok.
I think he also made a point on wether laws should even be allowed to have a say on what you do with your body (as long as you're not harming others), which is an excellent point too.
The rest, including the plot twist was emotional fluff, and while exiting, not that interesting to talk about. (well, besides the fact that the person running a background check on the boy is probably a puppet for the other side, and weird that Nomaru didn't suspect anything, especially since he and Itzuki were co-conspirators )
But yeah, there were so many actual good arguments to choose from, and they went with stupid shit.
Stuff like
the law may cause uncaring family members to push for suicides(inheritances, stop being a burden, insert reason based on greed here).
The law may remove incentives to further improve the various systems that failed.
Stuff like the needless suffering that would go away if people could get legally assisted suicide?
Or since it's japan, you could focus on the dignity aspect of choosing when/how to die instead of slowly withering away, with a lot of pain or with decreasing mental facilities, etc.
They also could've added more nuance, instead of for or against, we could've had members disagreeing on details of the law.
All in all, this was a disappointing episode, but that was mainly caused because some people really hyped me up for the debate.
|