Do you believe kevorkian is a murderer? Should euthanasia be legal?

Question

age old question where id like to here some of peoples thoughts on this. I believe they should pass if they want to in a more peaceful way.

Answer 1

No I don't think it is murder. Why should a person suffer more if there is no hope. I don't see it any different than them committing suicide by their own hand.

When animals are in pain and we can't help them we put them to sleep and consider it mercy but if you try to do it for a person it is considered murder.

I personally think that if a person wants to euthanize themselves they should but I think that there should be a contract that is signed by four people saying that this is what the patient wants. The doctor, the patient, a nuetral third party, and a notary. This way family members can't claim murder or try to over turn the decision later on.

Answer 2

With Kevorkian it goes to motive. Kevorkian killed, but he didn't do it for the purpose of the evil murder, but rather for the good purpose of ending pain. The end of a life is just a regrettable but necessary side effect of his plan to end pain. Meaning that if Kevorkian knew of a way to completely end pain without killing them, he would have used it. While what he did was murder, I wouldn't call him a murderer (which suggests killing for the want to kill), but I would say he is wrong for what he did. But you are right on this complicated issue, they should be allowed in some way to end the pain. Unfortunately, I can't figure out a way.

Answer 3

Life belongs to God and Kevorkian is playing God when he "helps" people to die. As to euthanasia, think about it a little.

Who decides who should be euthanized? Under what circumstances should one be euthanized? You open up that door, even under the pretence of compassion, and before you know it you're on the list for euthanasia for some other reason.
Hitler's Germany taught us that. It's a lesson we do well not to forget.

Answer 4

I believe that death is the coward's way out of a situation if there is any chance at all of survival. However, I believe that when death is certain anyway, euthanasia is an acceptable alternative to a slow, torturous death.

Regardless, my belief in personal freedom trumps the former, so that if someone wanted to die he/she should be allowed to and enabled to, regardless of what I would want to do or the situation. In the case of terminally ill patients who cannot commit suicide on their own, it would be cruel to force them to live and taking away their freedom instead of allowing them to choose between life or death. It is not the government's place to control anyone's right to live or die.

For the same reason, I would oppose the death penalty.

Answer 5

No, I do not. On the fence as to weather or not it should be legal.

I grew up believing you'd go to hell if you commit suicide. However, If I were terminally ill , in pain and my quality of life was nothing. I probably would consider assisted suicide. The thought of having to depend on tubes to keep me going just isn't right. It's hard to judge how someone feels while going through something like that.

Answer 6

I think people should have a choice. I mean, people are free to make the choice to commit suicide or take too many pills or whatever. I personally don't agree with it, but as long as they are not hurting me or anyone else, I don't think we have a right to tell them what to do.

Answer 7

No he is not.
He saved people from a hell on earth.

There should not be laws that tell anyone what they can do with themselves.