Lectures of Col. R. G. Ingersoll - LatestIngersoll, Robert Green
Religion
Lectures of Col. R. G. Ingersoll - Latest
Ingersoll, Robert Green
Free thought
In the cases I have supposed it seems to me that each person would have
the right to destroy himself. It does not seem possible that the man
was under obligation to be devoured by a cancer; to remain upon the
ship and perish in flame; to throw away the poison and be tortured to
death by savages; to drop the dagger and endure the "mercies" of the
church.
If, in the cases I have supposed, men would have the right to take
their lives, then I was right when I said that "under many
circumstances a man has a right to kill himself."
Second, I denied that persons who killed themselves were physical
cowards. They may lack moral courage; they may exaggerate their
misfortunes, lose the sense of proportion, but the man who plunges the
dagger in his heart, who sends the bullet through his brain, who leaps
from some roof and dashes himself against the stones beneath, is not
and cannot be a physical coward.
The basis of cowardice is the fear of injury or the fear of death, and
when that fear is not only gone, but in its place is the desire to die,
no matter by what means, it is impossible that cowardice should exist.
The suicide wants the very thing that a coward fears. He seeks the
very thing that cowardice endeavors to escape.
So the man, forced to a choice of evils, choosing the less is not a
coward, but a reasonable man. It must be admitted that the suicide is
honest with himself. He is to bear the injury, if it be one.
Certainly there is no hypocrisy, and just as certainly there is no
physical cowardice.
Is the man who takes morphine rather than be eaten to death by a cancer
a coward?
Is the man who leaps into the sea rather than be burned a coward? Is
the man that takes poison rather than be tortured to death by savages
or "Christians" a coward?
Third, I also took the position that some suicides were sane; that they
acted on their best judgment, and that they were in full possession of
their minds.
Now, if, under some circumstances, a man has the right to take his
life, and if, under such circumstances, he does take his life, then it
cannot be said that he was insane.
Most of the persons who have tried to answer me have taken the ground
that suicide is not only a crime, but some of them have said that it is
the greatest of crimes. Now, if it be a crime, then the suicide must
have been sane. So all persons who denounce the suicide as a criminal
admit that he was sane. Under the law, an insane person is incapable
of committing a crime. All the clergymen who have answered me, and who
have passionately asserted that suicide is a crime, have by that
assertion admitted that those who killed themselves were sane.
They agree with me, and not only admit, but assert that "some who have
committed suicide were sane and in the full possession of their minds."
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account