Because some people, in spite of our incredible medical science, still need the option to end their lives when their life becomes unbearable. There are a whole lot of things we can do to make people comfortable, but for some people they are just not enough. Or the person's self-esteem is so damaged by the loss of control that they just can't cope. As long as sufficient safeguards are in place to prevent it from turning into euthanasia, it should be available to people who need it. We put our animals down all the time without giving them a choice. At least this is a choice a person makes after serious deliberation.
The only other thing I can think of is it should be legal because the people of Oregon have chosen three times to pass the same law, in spite of the Bush Administration's attempt to overturn state's rights.
2007-11-14 01:46:47
·
answer #1
·
answered by mommanuke 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
The argument is the same as in the abortion issue. People in pain will kill themselves, and denying them assistance means that they will do so more painfully.
Making abortions illegal will not stop them, merely drive them underground as they were before Roe vs. Wade, and more young girls will die because desperation drove them to use the dirty coat hanger. Making suicide illegal does not stop a person from killing themselves. Success means you are beyond punishment. How much incentive is prohibition in a case like that?
The advantage of physician assisted suicide would be that some persons who were considering it due to treatable conditions, such as depression, would be exposed to a medical alternative. Lives might actually be saved.
There is also the libertarian view, that we have a right to choose for ourselves. It is not the business of society to force us to live. Further, in circumstances where we are terminally ill we should have the option of pulling the plug should life become a burden.
2007-11-14 09:50:49
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
- People with terminal illnesses should have the right to die with dignity, rather than have their lives prolonged only to suffer miserably.
- It's better than the alternative of "do it yourself" suicide which leaves many families feeling desperate and confused -- when a terminal patient decides on PAS then they can have their family with them and say goodbye, where as if they did it themselves they could not have their families there for fear of implicating them in an assisted suicide.
- The right to die is a essential as the to live. We can do many things medically to prolong a terminal persons life, but what we need to ask is should we? The quantity of life cannot override the quality of that life. If I am terminal and I can have 6 months in misery or 2 months of a good life then end it peacfully by the help of my doctor - then I want 2 months and then check please.
2007-11-14 09:46:15
·
answer #3
·
answered by Susie D 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because watching terminally ill people, many of them aged, muttering in agony, writhing in their beds unconcious from the drugs which are supposed to ease their pain is pretty damn awful. There is no hope of recovery, not in any sense, and all you are doing is waiting for the pain to stop. They are not aware, and thats a blessing, but why prolong the inevitable. We forget that years ago those people would have been able to die earlier, now we insist on dragging them on only to linger in agony. And we call that humane.
2007-11-14 09:54:40
·
answer #4
·
answered by justa 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
As in the Declaration of Indepence, we have the right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. If you have the right to life, you implicitly have the right to die. The government has no business in telling you that you have to live.
In addition, suicide makes room for people who want to live. I don't know about you, but I'd rather see food, water, medicine and shelter go to someone or something that wants to live. Thus, suicide is not only good for society, but it's good for the environment.
2007-11-14 10:21:40
·
answer #5
·
answered by Benjamin Gladstone 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Is there a reason that you are waiting to the last minute?
Shame on you. (Sorry but I have a problem with procrastinators. It has really affected me negatively in the past and I'm having a hard time letting go.)
Think harder. Do some research. You can do it.
2007-11-14 09:44:48
·
answer #6
·
answered by Unsub29 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
How can you agree it should be legal and not have YOUR OWN reasons? Even if they aren't "correct" - you MUST have reasons to believe the way you do, right?
List why YOU think it should be legal and then find something external to support each one.
Because if you BELIEVE something and have NO reason why you believe it... wow. I cannot comprehend that.
2007-11-14 09:49:58
·
answer #7
·
answered by stay_fan2 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
When people are terminally ill and in great pain, there is no reason that they should be forced by law to continue living.
2007-11-14 09:44:37
·
answer #8
·
answered by regerugged 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
people should have the choice not have the choice made for them
terminal illnesses are extremely costly with all the medical bills
terminal illnesses are painful for the patient but also for the family
2007-11-14 09:49:17
·
answer #9
·
answered by curiousgeorge 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Do your own homework.
2007-11-14 09:43:00
·
answer #10
·
answered by nycityboy1234 3
·
0⤊
0⤋