Act of suicide is an immoral thing to do, because it kills life. Even if it is one's own life. It is still killing which is the most evil act to commit.

It is also an evil act in the sense that committing suicide is not just killing one's own life, but also it destroys the world the one has lived in. The moment one kills oneself, the world one belonged to also evaporates with all the people in it and all the memories, and relations one has built in it.

Therefore all life on earth has a moral duty to carry on until the old age and inevitable natural deaths.

Moreover, one cannot kill oneself, if one has something or someone one loves. Love is a strong foundation for life to be keep going. Loving can only continue and is possible while one is living.

Act of suicide is an immoral thing to do, because it kills life. Even if it is one's own life. It is still killing which is the most evil act to com — Corvus

Are you a pacifist? Do you think killing is wrong in all situations? War; self defence?

in all situations? War; self defence? — Tom Storm

Yes, it is wrong in all situations. However, the situations force the wrong doings.
In those special situations, killings can and will happen, which are totally different cases from willful act of the wrong doing.

Are you referring to human life or all life?

Are you referring to human life or all life? — LuckyR

For the topic of this thread, the discussions should be limited to human life only.

Got it. The presence of life, necessitates the presence of death. Thus death itself is not abnormal or "evil" or "wrong". Assuming humans have agency, then causing someone's death against their will is, as you've noted, the most wrong of wrongs. As would be causing someone's death at their request if you either believed they were incompetent or under external duress or temporary internal duress in my opinion. However, assisting someone who is competent and under permanent internal duress, is an extention of the hospice process, in my opinion.

:100:

... the old folk who complained most about old age were likely the same folk who began whinging in their teens and never stopped. — Tom Storm

:up:

what has gotten better is my ability to live with depression — Moliere

Me too.

Act of suicide is an immoral thing to do, because it kills life. Even if it is one's own life. It is still killing which is the most evil act to commit.

It is also an evil act in the sense that committing suicide is not just killing one's own life, but also it destroys the world the one has lived in. The moment one kills oneself, the world one belonged to also evaporates with all the people in it and all the memories, and relations one has built in it.

Therefore all life on earth has a moral duty to carry on until the old age and inevitable natural deaths. — Corvus

A moral duty? Why?

This is spoken like someone who has never talked to someone who has chosen doctor-assisted death. How dare you judge them. I know someone who chose MAID (medical assistance in death) and they were the most moral person I ever knew.

A few weeks before his death, he told me, "I am excited about it, the way you get excited when you are going camping. You know that excited feeling you get planning a camping trip. That is how I feel."

Can you imaging a suffering so great in this life that you want to give this life up?

Therefore all life on earth has a moral duty to carry on until the old age and inevitable natural deaths. — Corvus

I think that's a little sweeping. Most life on earth doesn't have a choice in the matter. That excludes choice, which excludes morality. (Incidentally, it also rules out the widely respected activity of defending one's family, etc.at the cost of one's own life.)
In fact, the idea that we have a moral duty to carry on until we drop acknowledges that we have a choice. The discovery of suicide by human beings is a radical difference from most other life forms in that respect. One cannot expect to simply rule out the choice if it exists, so the question "why carry on?" needs a response, not a ban.
True, in many cases, thoughts of suicide pass. They may be the product of circumstances or illnesses. But it does not follow from that that it can never be a sober, rational choice. The sceptical "Are you sure?" or "You can never tell what the future might bring" can be appropriate. But if it is not to dissolve into the arid wastes of philosophical scepticism, it needs to be backed up with solid answers - not mere gestures.

Can you imaging a suffering so great in this life that you want to give this life up? — Questioner

I can't imagine that. But I've seen it. Twice.
In those cases, there was no choice available. But if someone in that situation makes a choice, it seems to me to be straightforwardly cruel to try to prevent them achieving their goal. Loved ones may grieve, but active prevention would not be an act of love, but of selfishness.
Now someone will ask me how I know that the choice was a real choice. The answer is, the same way that I know that the choice to stay alive until the bitter end is a real choice, when it is.

But if someone in that situation makes a choice, it seems to me to be straightforwardly cruel to try to prevent them achieving their goal. Loved ones may grieve, but active prevention would not be an act of love, but of selfishness. — Ludwig V

Thank you for that.

Can you imaging a suffering so great in this life that you want to give this life up? — Questioner

Yeah dude. I have made multiple attempts on my life - two in succession, but the first weakened me too much to complete the second in short order.

I have a pretty nuanced view on suicide due to the above, coupled with two of my closest and best friends I have ever had killing themselves some years apart.

Suicide is devastating. It is harmful. It is almost unbearable for some of those left behind. One of my friends mother has never recovered. He died in 2019 and she still spends a certain amount of her time on her computer looking at his search history, his Facebook page and old messaged on his cell phone. It is horrible. It hurts.

But being in a position that you want to kill yourself hurts plenty more than I have ever felt as a reaction to a suicide. Forcing someone to endure what they perceive to unending misery, active, painful, scalding misery is immoral.

It is a lesser of two evils.

Until you come to the conclusion I have - which is that wanting to die is a product of the mind. Unless one is happy, and wants to die, it is, in a major sense, an illegitimate conclusion to draw about life.

So, do i blame those who kill themselves as immoral? No. It's a-moral. But I do harshly judge those who think its their right to enforce someone else's misery to save them the pain of that loss.

Can you imaging a suffering so great in this life that you want to give this life up? — Questioner

The people who are supposed to have been suffering and decided to end their life could have been actually claims of the relatives who want to speed up their inheritance, or the media which are financed by the corrupt politicians who want to reduce the care expenditures, so that they can get bigger salaries.

But if someone in that situation makes a choice, it seems to me to be straightforwardly cruel to try to prevent them achieving their goal. Loved ones may grieve, but active prevention would not be an act of love, but of selfishness. — Ludwig V

Please read my post above with attention. Suffering cannot be a proper reason for ending one's life. Life itself can be viewed as suffering.