Should our world practice euthanasia?

Question

Would it help solve some of our problems, like over population?

Answer 1

Yes.
Not to solve over population though. Euthanasia is commonly used for animals when they are extremely ill or injured. It is used to stop their pain. I think that people should have the same option. Those who are terminally ill, Alzheimer's patients, and others who are unable to care for themselves should have this option. I feel that this is a personal issue and it should be allowed.

Answer 2

I depends on who is deciding and for what reason.

If an individual is deciding because their life is torturously painful, then I say yes. Yes, the individual has the Right to end their suffering. If anyone quotes scripture here, remember the one in pain has the Right to have a different religion than you. I do not feel this is debatable. If we truly have the Right to our own religion, then we must also have the Right to choose exactly what our religious convictions are without the need to justify them. The only exception is when we feel the need to force our religion upon someone else.

Would this solve over population? No. To enforce euthanasia upon a population would only take away freedom and end up in genocide of one community or another.

The only answer I can see is self domestication. If we as a world choose to live together and choose to control ourselves and our passions, then we will know peace. This will not happen by force. It might happen by a majority of wise individuals choosing of their own free will to teach others how to choose to be peaceful. Living peacefully is not an easy choice. Living within our means is even harder. Choosing to say no will bring the population down and women are the ones in complete control of that.

Answer 3

Well, I don't think it's a method of curing overpopulation! You can't just start killing people because you think there are too many of them. There was an old sci-fi movie like that. They tried to limit the population by bumping off anyone that was "over-the-hill" I think the age was 30! So I'd be a goner! I think it was called Logan's Run or something...anyway, no euthanasia only makes sense when a person is suffering & has no hope of getting better. If someone wants to die with dignity rather than being hooked up to a life-support machine then they should be allowed to die. Pulling the plug on someone terminally ill & in pain who wants to die is quite different from intentionally killing someone (lethal injection etc) who hasn't stated their wishes (a living will etc). I don't think it's right to take someone's life without their consent (if they're in a coma etc) but it's a very complex issue...Very tough. If an animal is suffering we think it's inhumane to prolong their suffering. Yet we let people writhe in hospitals & languish for years...tough call. There are arguments for & against. No simple yes or no answer it's all grey area...

Answer 4

I am terminally ill and have come as close as I possibly can to control my death/life? I have signed Living Will papers and also papers to denote who will be in charge of my health procedures. This person knows that I want "NO" codes called for me except .... no EOP....which means no extra-ordinary procedures to be done on me. Is this Euthanasia? I won't allow breathing tubes, antibiotics etc when I am at the end. Both of my daughters are nurses and they both know my desires. They have a copy of my living will etc. I don't believe in euthanasia for over-population - that is just out right killing people. Maybe make a law about taking the "PILL"? I don't have the answers for it because I am too busy making every day count.

Answer 5

Take the example of the former white middle class America. The best way to curb the population is to give people enough toys that their attention is not fixated on intercourse and romanticism. Every poor destitute population in the world has a skyrocketing birthrate, even when disease and starvation takes out a significant portion of the population.

Pamper the population, have them live by democratic process, and you'll see the population decline significantly.

Answer 6

It seems like a merciful idea, and an extremely dangerous one.

The ultra poor, the aged who usually become poorer than the rest of the population, the very sick--all would be expected not to burden society needlessly (who determines what is needed or needless?).

I believe the Eskimos practiced this in the past. If it was voluntary or not I do not know. The Dutch permit this upon request.

Answer 7

use a contraceptive for over population.use euthanasia for people who want to end there life who are in so much pain they cannot live with it anymore,but let the person who is suffering make the decision

Answer 8

It is a sensible and humane solution to a very large problem.
Yes ! As long as it is voluntary.
But it simply will not do because the old and the infirmed are too valuable a resource as guinepigs for testing new medicines in the name of science, that it just simply cannot be allowed in the name of humanity.
What a crock of shite aye ?

Answer 9

First we started with abortion. And that hasn't helped solve over population? Now euthanasia? Overpopulation? Why don't we opt for new technologies and build homes and neighborhoods where now man does not live. And learn new ways to produce foods that are healthier and feed man. If we are so intelligent, then why not prove it to ourselves?

Answer 10

no! i strongly disagree to euthanasia!!!
it is a wrong practice..
and i think it is not the right solution to over population..