shouldnt a sane man or woman have the freedom to decide when they want to pass on? freedom to live and die in peace provided it does not hurt another and helps the sick one.
2006-10-31 18:45:28 · 10 answers · asked by j 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Yes, I do believe that people should have the right to decide when it is time for them to pass on when they have a terminal illness. If people are free to chose the way they "live" then those with special circumstances should also be allowed to chose when and how they "die". It seems that we as a society are far more humane to animals then to ourselves.
2006-10-31 19:07:48 · answer #1 · answered by Sundar 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
well it is not illegal in all the countries of the world. example:-
Euthanasia was legalized in Australia's Northern Territory, by the Rights of the Terminally Ill Act 1995. Soon after, the law was voided by an amendment by the Commonwealth to the Northern Territory (Self-Government) Act 1978. The powers of the Northern Territory legislature, unlike those of the State legislatures, are not guaranteed by the Australian Constitution. However, before the Commonwealth government made this amendment, three people had already been legally euthanised. The first person was a taxi driver, Bob Dent, who died on 22 September 1996.
2006-11-01 02:55:10 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why do you assume that everybody has a right to do anything that doesn't hurt anybody else? American law has never operated on that assumption. It is up to the legislatures, ..... -- ahem -- it is SUPPOSED to be up to the legislatures to decide what does or does not need to be regulated.
2006-11-01 03:16:10 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
YES IT SHOULD. BUT ANIMALS ARE IN A LOWER CATEGORY,THEN HUMANS. MONDAY NIGHT MY DAUGHTER GOT A CALL FROM HER BOYFRIEND, AND HE SAID THAT HE SAW A DOG THAT HAD JUST GOTTEN HIT BY A CAR ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD, SO HE CALLED THE POLICE, AND THEY TOLD HIM TO SHOOT IT, AND HE SAID NO, ANYWAY 'S TO MAKE A LONG STORY SHORT AFTER TWO HOURS OF WAITING FOR THE POLICE TO COME, THEY DID , AND THE POLICE SHOT THE DOG. THIS IS NOT THE FIRST TIME OF MY-SELF HEARING ABOUT THIS, I HAVE A POLICE SCANNER AND, ONE TIME SOMETHING WAS WRONG WITH A HORSE, AND THE POLICE TOLD THEM TO SHOOT IT. I'M SICK OF THIS GOING ON IN TENNESSEE. I'M SORRY FOR RAMBLING ON, BUT IT SURE FELT GOOD TO LET IT OUT.
2006-11-01 02:57:11 · answer #4 · answered by tinkerbell 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
MARK D I'M NOT SURE I WANT THE LEGISLATURE TO MAKE ANY DECISIONS, ESPECIALLY IF IT HAS TO DO WITH MY LIFE. I don't feel religions should make these decisions because there are too many religions and I don't know which one should win.
2006-11-01 03:40:44 · answer #5 · answered by #1barnie 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I see your point, but you cant compare a human life to an animals life.
2006-11-01 02:51:28 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Here we go; as long as you're not hurting anyone else, it's ok. Because "human life" is still sacred; we're not an animal. And it isn't up to us to make that decision to end ours or someone elses life. And please don't ask whose it would be up to.
2006-11-01 02:50:50 · answer #7 · answered by Nancy D 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
so laws are just catching up to the 21st century
2006-11-01 02:49:10 · answer #8 · answered by cork 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because we are all hypocrites by nature
2006-11-01 02:51:51 · answer #9 · answered by lisaaz29 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
sometimes doctors can "ease suffering"
2006-11-01 03:41:04 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋