Another debate I have, and even though I'm for active euthanasia, I must debate against it. My main points consist of religion, and hope. Another point that I try to encorporate is that according to the physicians code of ethics, mercy killing is not permissible. Basically for both PVS patients, and Brain dead patients should be kept alive as long as possible, whether they want to live or not, because as human beings we're not allowed to kill.
I can already predict some of the contradictions, but bring them on, I want to see what I might be facing, and please no answers saying how you agree with me, I only want people to contradict me. Do your best and thank you for your time.
2007-03-14 06:21:17 · 6 answers · asked by Allen S 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
First off, America isn't (supposedly) governed by Christianity. Separation of Church and State, when actually practiced, keeps religion out of the process of creating laws.
Physicians take an oath that states "do no harm" first and foremost. However, patients who apply to Oregon's euthanasia program will argue that they would be doing harm by keeping them alive. It's not like these people have gotten tired of life and want to quit paying taxes. They are terminally ill patients in a great deal of pain.
You have to have a series of phychiatric evaluations done by licensed professionals over a period of more than six months.
These people can choose to die, with dignity, surrounded by family. We routinely euthanize animals in the effort to be *humane*, so why doesn't that apply to....HUMANS?!@?
Oregon has not reported a *single* problem with their comprehensive program since its inception in October of 1997. Not one.
The program obviously works.
2007-03-14 06:43:11 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The only flaw (lol besides active euthanasia should be a right for anyone suffering with terminal illness, but that is beside the point) is the brain death is dead - you are not killing anyone by withdrawing support from a person who is already dead. Our bodily functions can carry on after our brain has ceased function - not well, a great deal of autoregulation is lost and mechanical ventilation is an absolutel necessity.
So euthanasia is not an issue in brain death because well - dead is dead!
Now PSV is a horse of a different color - brain activity still occurs, but is extremely impaired. There are also cases where the RAS has been destroyed in which you just won't wake up again - your brain continues to function.
Okay - I'm done. lol sorry <
2007-03-14 06:39:20 · answer #2 · answered by Susie D 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
People should have the right to end there life with dignity, Under certain conditions like terminal illness. If the person has a living will under those conditions it should be provided, Everyone has different values and good for them they have there rights as well but It should be up to the indivigual not law makers that inpose there belifes upon others that want society to do as they say. After all this is suposed to be a free country, That is why the constitution has a ammendment for the seperation of church and state but that has loop holes with the lop sided religious right zellotts.
2007-03-14 06:30:28 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
i believe in euthanasia. when i am sick beyond cure i do not want to languish in a stinking bed waiting for life to end.
it is too pathetic and humilliating. both my husband and i have our wishes in owr wills.
doctors have been practicing euthanasis since times memorial. only, they don't talk about it and nobody has ever questioned it... the parties involved make a tacit decision. it's just non verbal comunication.
it is more inmoral to keep pushing life at the expense of insurance, hospitals, government. it is a lie to constantly administer medication and doing procedures to someone we know has no hope.
it is more loving, dignified, respectful and sensitive to end the suffering to someone who already has gone thru a lot.
that is not life, i do not want that. i would rather go while i still tolerate people's stares , while people can still tolerate looking at me w/o revoting inside... and it happenss, believe me... has nothing to do with religion....after all religions of all denominations are in disrepute right now.. the catholics? the evangelicals? the mormons? the jews? the moslems? thing ... what have they been doing in the name of god... killing each other w/o mercy.... so killing someone we love out of respect and dignity is not teally killing...if we aren't allod to kill, then how do these governments justify all he killing hat is going on... because it is war? give me a break, war is the last resurce and countries are using them as the primary source....think of all the mamed solders that are coming back from iraq... do they deserve to live like that...like a vegatable, like a retard, like a lump of meat w/o legs or arm, or eyes...have y seen the pictures? mercy killing is better... believe me
2007-03-14 06:39:48 · answer #4 · answered by colonita 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I am an athiest that only believes in one "evil" which is sufferring. If an old, worn out, constantly in pain person wanted to die, I feel I have no authority to stop them and frown upon anyone that feels they do. I do not think any heirarchy should have that authority. Respect life but don't worship it. If an animal is in pain and I see no hope for it's recovery I have the same mercy. The less painful and scarey I can make it the better.
2007-03-14 06:28:54 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well, I am pro-suicide. If you feel like you want to end your life, you should be able to, which is why living wills are so important. Why should you be forced to live a miserable existance? If a person is terminal and there is no hope to get any relief, why shouldn't the person be able to die with dignity and not have to suffer any more than they have to?
2007-03-14 06:28:59 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋