Im writting a debate about it for one of my taks for WPB (im in year nine) and i was wondring what everyone else thought about that because im thinking that it shouldn't
but what do you think?
2007-07-19 20:10:29 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
This is a personal matter, and should a person be of legal age, and consenting, I believe they have the right.
The reason for their decision is not for another to determine right or wrong, as this is a personal moral issue.
You or I may disagree with their decision based on our own morals, or ideals, but that is our problem, not theirs.
2007-07-20 01:52:25 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
I have lost very dear relatives to long drawn out and painful illnesses, I think we should have the choice in those circumstances. But i think it should be the sufferers choice and not a family member or a doctors, something should be put in place so that it should not be abused, after seeing my loved ones die slowly it made me think, what would happen when my time comes, i would not want to go like that, I would like the choice to die with dignity and with my family around me, I also think that one day euthanasia will become a reality, maybe within the next 50-100 years.
2007-07-26 03:23:12 · answer #2 · answered by stormchaser 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
My grandfather just died. Fortunately he didn't suffer for very long but the situation could have been different. He had lung cancer and there was nothing the doctors could do. In a situation like that, shouldn't he nave the choice to go quietly, on his own terms? The alternative is potentially suffocating to death because his lungs can't process oxygen. The people who are against physician assisted suicide are frankly selfish because, in the interests of their own moral comfort, they would rather see a stranger suffer than end their own life.
2007-07-19 20:33:01 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
No.
A primary Buddhist belief is to alleviate suffering. This applies to death, too. Most Buddhists, and people, would rather die sooner and peacefully than suffer slowly and agonizingly.
After all, doesn't it make sense to alleviate someone's suffering so they can go with peace, then let them slowly waste away? And anyway, people should be able to control their own bodies and lives: if someone wants to die peacefully, would you deprive them of that right? It doesn't seem fair.
Obviously, if made legal, this could be abused. But they could make it legal in some cases, at least, and watch euthanasia carefully.
2007-07-19 20:27:23 · answer #4 · answered by ? 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
If you really want to form an opinion, ask the people who are most affected by this issue. Visit some terminally ill patients. Sit up with them all night as they suffer in pain. Ask them how they feel about the issue. There's a good reason why people fight for the right to end their own lives with dignity. Some terminal illnesses, if left to conclude on their own, will cause the afflicted to die slow, agonizing deaths. Try to imagine what it would be like to be one of these poor people, in constant pain with no hope of getting better, only more pain and possibly loss of bodily functions to look forward to. What if the disease is a degenerative brain disorder. Imagine losing your memories, your ability to reason, your ability to control your body. Imagine losing those parts of your personality that make you you. I know I'd rather have the freedom to control my life in this situation. I would want to end my life on my terms while I'm still me.
2007-07-19 20:26:28 · answer #5 · answered by Solarcide 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Euthanasia is Legal.
It is the practice of every government proscribing psyche meds. They nearly all result in death after prolonged suffering. They are the modern torture chamber of the modern despot. There are even laws specifically preventing the State or private doctors from being harmed by lawsuits for murdering a patient by psyche meds. There is no standard of care; it is a standard of hate crime.
2007-07-27 07:13:35 · answer #6 · answered by Wade H 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Although it sounds like it could make sense on the surface, underneath it all it's going down a dangerous path. Liberals love it of course.
People could become in danger of being "euthanized" if they don't meet an arbitrary liberal standard of having a so-called "quality of life" or be so unfortunate as to acquire the flu after age 65.
2007-07-19 20:15:43 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
In terminal illness cases subjecting the patient to acute pain and a certain death ---- it should be legalised , under proper and authorised medical practitoner and duly recorded in the records of the hospital.
2007-07-20 01:56:44 · answer #8 · answered by brij_26pal 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
It's really a tough call, because people who might want Euthanasia might not be in an adequate mental state to make that decision.
2007-07-19 20:14:24 · answer #9 · answered by billybutsky 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Why not? We kill thousands of babies every day, in the name of the "right to choose". What's wrong with a few thousand seniors? After all they're such a drain. They contribute nothing to the economy, they milk Social Security, and they're an emotional and financial drain on thier "grateful" children.
2007-07-19 20:21:02 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋