• gregorum@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The Nazis didn’t give those (or many people) a choice; it was forced upon them. This isn’t comparable at all.

    • Neato@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      If your choice is no treatment vs suicide, that's not really a choice, either.

      Also you can't really give someone a choice in life vs death when their mental state is unstable.

      • gregorum@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Treatment is an option. And people are evaluated before being allowed to end their lives this way.

        • Neato@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Ideally. But if that's the case, why limit it to people with drug addictions? Why limit it to the vulnerable and mentally impaired? Drug addicts aren't usually terminal patients. What if this was applied but only to overweight people? Or smokers? Or the poor?

          • gregorum@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            You’re free to ponder those questions, but what California and Canada are doing has nothing to do with the Nazis.

      • gregorum@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        What evidence do you have of coercion or of any addicts being driven out of/told to leave Cali or Canada?