ChrisMarshallNY is sitting in judgment of the fellow in Holland who made use of the euthanasia laws there.

Specifically:

"I find it doubly tragic, as there are proven alternative solutions" (judgment)

"I personally know many people that were once far worse off than that gentleman, and are now doing quite well" (justification that invalidates the man's suffering)

"Lots of folks have opinions on it, but I have experience with it." (Pushing his opinion above others, to hammer the judgment home)

He doesn't know Mark Langedijk's mind and soul, and yet he feels comfortable desecrating the man's legacy.

I don't find that to be overly invalidating or judgmental.

There is a difference between saying you think someone is/was wrong, and denying their humanity.

It’s the definition of judgmental to say someone is wrong like that. You’re judging their actions as wrong.

Note that I said overly judgmental. Judgment itself is part of the human condition. You can judge an action or choice without demeaning or dehumanizing the person. You can even do it from a place of empathy understanding and compassion.

The idea of that people shouldn't or can't judge any choice or action another makes is absurd at face value.

Except you very rarely have enough information to make informed judgements. It’s inherently dehumanizing to assume the limited information you get from say a news article is all that’s relevant because it treats them as cardboard cutouts of actual people.

It’s easy to see a pregnant teen and think poor thoughts about them without considering if perhaps they are older than you assume and married or they got rapped etc. Read about a convict and perhaps they did something horrible or perhaps they’re wrongly convicted, you simply didn’t know.

You have a point, but I would submit that "desecrating the man's legacy" is a bit ... shall we say ... over-the-top ... rhetoric?

I assume that you have known many, many folks like him (and like me), and are comfortable being extremely and overtly judgmental.

Too bad. I looked at your GH profile, and I suspect that we'd find a lot in common.

Hacker News civility makes it more acceptable to use an over the top phrase like that, where normally I suspect he would have jumped to straightforward ones like “being a dick”.

Well, like I have said, before, I always find it fascinating, when folks in a professional venue, initiate relationships with an attack.

Not exactly sure the advantages it brings, but never a dull moment, eh?

The idea that any posts in this thread "invalidate's this man's suffering" is hyperbole.

Anyway, what's wrong with judgement? Despite some people's insistence on it being taboo, there's nothing wrong with judging other people's behavior.

From what I've seen, I have no doubt Chris means well.

People everywhere have all different things worth living for, and of course there are ups & downs that vary across time and relationships.

Regardless whether someone has the capacity to be helpful or harmful, almost always some judgement needs to be made or absolutely neither one will be forthcoming.

And there is always going to be someone else to disagree.

Whether either one is correct I wonder who is supposed to be the judge of that?

I see not a word of desecration.

Looking at the story of this particular dying Dutchman, seems to me the only thing within reach beforehand were quite temporary solutions not capable of overcoming relatively longer term problems.