i mean im doing this research paper and i'm beginning to really get clueless.. can anyone help me?? any views?? plz state the source.. i need the arguments for and against!!
2007-03-23 16:22:25 · 21 answers · asked by [MiA] 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Let us suppose the purpose of life is to deepen awareness. The experience of approaching death may be distressing and painful but it can produce profound changes in people, the rewards could be incalculable. For example, to take one of many, my grandfather all his life a non-Christian, hours before his death repented, it was the culminating moment in his life, for him it was the difference between a purposeful and a wasted life, between heaven and hell. While no one really understands the meaning of life who are we to be so arrogant as to take away one hour of it.
2007-03-23 16:26:59 · answer #1 · answered by Kyrie eleison - Christe eleison 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I think if it were easier to get optimal pain management there would be less discussion of the subject. You have to consider that there are lots of areas--take being paraplegia for an example--in which if you poll people without the problem, there's a high number of people who sincerely say they'd rather be dead, but the number drops precipitously when you poll people who are already in that situation. Also, the subject is obviously a matter of life and death, so the strictest of safeguards against inappropriate use or even outright abuse, would be needed, and I'm not sure there's a practical way to do that. If I had a family member in that situation, I think I'd not worry about the legalities. If you feel that strongly that an instance of euthenasia is justified, you should be OK with the attendant prison time.
2007-03-23 16:40:43 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Only under the most strict and regulated conditions. Yes, if someone is dying from a terminal illness and is going to suffer, (s)he should be allowed to choose assisted suicide as an option.
But, you can't let it get out of control wherein some greedy siblings decide to 'do away' with Mom or Dad just because they want the inheritance now, before it's eaten up by the medical profession.
It's a difficult debate. -RKO-
2007-03-23 16:29:03 · answer #3 · answered by -RKO- 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think it should be legalized, I have seen a few people really suffer before they passed on from cancer and I know they wouldn't have wanted to feel so much pain, I think it is up to the individual to decide, but If I ever had to deal with unbearable pain like that I would consider this option if it was legal. No one should have to suffer like that.
2007-03-23 16:47:11 · answer #4 · answered by Urchin 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well, there's only one argument against it, and that is that taking someone's life from them is the ultimate act of violence against the individual's sovereignty.
Once that's gone, even on the basis of their being terminal, infirm, or aged, it's a short step to euthanasia based on race, or poltical affiliation.
Once it starts, everyone is on the list, really. It's just a matter of where on the list we are.
2007-03-23 16:38:14 · answer #5 · answered by open4one 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Asking our opinion is one thing, but asking us to site sources is asking us to basically do all of your research for you. Do your own homework.
If you want to get started on your paper begin with Dr. Jack Kervorkian. You can learn a little bit about him here.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Kevorkian
and i personally feel it should be legalized. To me this is a religious issue, and the government has no right to decide those types of issues for us.
2007-03-23 16:33:03 · answer #6 · answered by corbienest 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I believe it should be up to the individual.
Unfortunately, suicide itself is against the law. And therefor, euthanasia should be as well.
However, I would rather see some sort of conscent form be created to allow those who would like to participate in euthanasia to, well, participate!
2007-03-23 16:25:40 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes. It should be. I have had several animals euthanized due to serious illness. It would have been unfair to let them suffer. I loved these pets dearly but I did the right thing and the unselfish thing. Same goes for people with terminal illness. I believe it should be legal. It should be the persons choice. Why suffer?
2007-03-23 16:26:19 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
We live in a world that loves to torture people by making them live in agony for days and days when there is no hope of recovery. That is so Loving. I know that everyone should have the opportunity to die in agony.
Personally I think this absurd way we treat people like that is due to religion. Most people who are against euthanasia are so for religious reasons. Yet why should that have to apply to anyone but THEMSELVES. How is it that religious people get to decide for EVERYONE?
SCREW Religious Nonsense. It's no one's business but the one who's ill.
2007-03-23 16:31:03 · answer #9 · answered by Atheistic 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I think I can only state my opinion on the matter, not facts. I am for Euthanasia. Why? Because people who are willing to commit euthanasia is because they are terminally ill. Think about lung cancer, one of the most painful. Do you want to die in complete pain, or do you want to die on your own terms that is painless? These people are going to die anyway. I think this should be their dhoice in how they are going to die.
There are those who are against it. Why? Because it's against God. It's techinically suicide. They think that they will go to Hell if they commit this type of suicide.
I say, they are suffering. They them choose how they are going to die.
2007-03-23 16:26:41 · answer #10 · answered by CC 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋