Gay rights were never passed as constitutional amendments, but were subsequently included under the equal protection clause of the pre-existing Fourteenth Amendment which overrode state legal practices.

As should be the same with suicidal practices (such as PAS) so as to override state legal practices. Just as same sex marriage was legal in some states but not all, PAS is legal in one state (Ohio) but should be legal in all.

who's to say someone's suffering will last this long? give me context so i can try and give you something back.

Say someone has been depressed for 20 years with no signs of getting better. Should they waste away an extra x years thriving on 'hope'?

Or, say someone has been suffering with cancer. They spend a ton of money trying to get rid of their problem but it just keeps coming back with more force.

"[..] it should be a decision likely to be made by all versions of yourself throughout your potential life so as to spare yourself from impulse."

You are invoking your ought and ought-not's in others' life decisions. I explicitly stated that the person had to be perfectly rational (i.e. not high on drugs, delusional, or ill-informed about their situation). I will also note that even in your happy state your are 'not all versions of yourself'. Essentially, you are, technically, never 'all versions of yourself'.

what-if's are an almost inevitable consequence of thought

The 'what-ifs' I am referring to is the alleviation of their problems (e.g. what if after this round of expensive chemotherapy I will get better, even thought the chances are 1%?). Not the 'general' most obvious 'what-ifs'.

You seem to be ill-suited for this topic as your decisions are stemming from your current cognitive state (sort of like a rich person saying that "poor people should just get over it be happy and relax."). You are also neglecting the philosophical viewpoint- which, sadly, this topic has become one even though suicide is a natural decision.

Interpreting the constitution that way is illegal in most states (or in all states if the reason for suicide is not 'terminal illness'). So while I understand your point, you seem to neglect the legal perspective.

I'm suggesting the same way they sort of specified 'gay rights' in the constitution, they should do the same for 'rights' in terms of death.

That expiration date can be chosen. Would you want somebody to waste away their life by suffering endlessly for decades? Or, would you rather them take a peaceful exit never worrying about 'would-ifs' ever again?

"Suicide" is, technically, not secured under the constitution- it would be classified as a "right to die" which could mean a variety of things- most of which are illegal in most states (like PAS, passive euthanasia, euthanasia, etc.). Your phraseology is what is flawed- 'freedom of speech' is a secured constitutional right- but one with limitations.

This is more of a technical statement-it almost dismisses the point of most suicides. Moreover, this applies to a non-suicidal person. For people who are suicidal, there is an urgency attached to it.