Euthanasia - do you agree with it?

Daenerys

Daenerys

The Last Dragon
Veteran
Joined
Nov 26, 2006
Messages
11,178
Age
33
Location
Suburban hell.
Gil
1
This is a topic that came up in my RE class last year, we had a vote and surprisingly about 75% of the class agreed that Euthanasia is a good thing.

For those of you that dont know what it means Euthanasia means Assisted suicide, where a terminally ill person can go to a special clinic where they will help you kill yourself.

A lot of people that disagreed with it say'd that its not right because God is the only one whos meant to decide when we die. and the fact is that your helping someone kill themselves is murder.

And the people who said that Euthanasia should be allowed because if a person is either in a lot of pain or wont be able to look after themselves and want to maintain there dignity should be allowed to commit Euthanasia.

I agree with the najority - its not fair to allow someone to live in pain or not have any dignity - especially when they wouldnt want that themselves.

Your thoughts?

And i do hope ive put this in the right place - if not could you please move it to the correct place?
 
Looks fine where it is :)

And yes I support Euthanasia - if someone wishes it, and is suffering from a terminal illness and does not want to lose what dignity they have left - who are we to stop them from ending their own lives in a peaceful way? It is OUR life, so we should ultimately have the ultimate and final sayso in something like this.
 
I am a firm believer that Euthanasia should be allowed, and should NOT be illegal.

Many people who suffer from degenerative diseases and terminal illnesses are often left with little or no quality of life, in a vegetative state, or confined to wheelchairs or beds with no movement other than their eyes. It is my belief, that these people should be given a choice of whether they have to suffer no quality of life, or whether they can be given help to die a dignified death.

Apparantly, somewhere in Europe, there is a company which provides just this service, and I have read that some people will use their savings just so they can die the dignified death they deserve.
 
I don't think that anyone should be punished for helping another person to die, when that person wanted to die in the first place, is not murder if that person have chosen death, so is my oppinion that it should not be considerate a crime.

Now if it comes to a situation, for example that a person falls in a comatose state, where it is impossible to determinate if the person wants to die or not, it would be ultimate the family and only the family who should have the final word, if they want to keep this person alive or end his misery.
 
QuickSilverD said:
Now if it comes to a situation, for example that a person falls in a comatose state, where it is impossible to determinate if the person wants to die or not, it would be ultimate the family and only the family who should have the final word, if they want to keep this person alive or end his misery.
Click to expand...

I agree there, in the case of a comatose state, if theres no improvement within a specified time period, then euthanasia should of course be considered. After all, keeping a person alive for years on end is just inhumane, and you wouldnt treat an animal like that, so why should a human be treated like that.
 
Just want to make a point - if a person has made a living will, or whatever you call it, when they say do not want to be kept alive, the family would have to respect the will. If the person does not have a family..well, it'll be different.
This kinda reminds me of the Terry Schiavo case. I heard a friend of hers had said she made a living will, saying she did not want to be kept alive if she came to be in this position. However, the parents still tried to keep her alive, allowing religion more then anything to influence their decision.
I wonder if people at the time knew she wasn't actually going to recover whatsoever. In the end, she was basically allowed to die, but the method of starvation, was particularly cruel.
 
I agree with Judge Rulia - that the Girl who was allowed to die should have been allowed to die in a more dignified less cruel way - thats why i agree with euthanasia - less painful and cruel to the terminally ill :(

what a depressing topic :(
 
Aeris Gainsborough said:
I agree with Judge Rulia - that the Girl who was allowed to die should have been allowed to die in a more dignified less cruel way - thats why i agree with euthanasia - less painful and cruel to the terminally ill :(

what a depressing topic :(
Click to expand...

The problem is the legal implications of killing someone, not the moral ones as most people would agree that it could be considerate an act of pity and humanity.

I was looking information about the legality of Euthanasia on wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euthanasia#Legislation_and_national_political_movementsand found out that though it is legal under certain conditions in some places like, Australia, Texas and consideration of it in the UK is not legal in most of the world.

Interesting according to the article most Americans agree with Euthanasia (60%), also according to it, sex is factor over the matter

The research has not found sex to be a significant factor in predicting opinion about euthanasia. However, some studies have shown that there are differences in views between males and females. A recent Gallup Poll found that 84% of males supported euthanasia compared to 64% of females. Some cite the prior studies showing that women have a higher level of religiosity and moral conservatism as an explanation. Within both sexes, there are differences in attitudes towards euthanasia due to other influences. For example, one study found that African-American women are 2.37 times more likely to oppose euthanasia than European-American women. African-American men are 3.61 times more likely to oppose euthanasia than European-American men
Click to expand...
Also I found out about a “World Federation of Right to Die Societies” [their site] I had no idea that there was an organization that assisted euthanasia.
 
Well is a difficult Question because at the side of religion its a bad thing.
I dont know what i would do if i were in a position were i had to decide what to do_Or if i would b in a position were i am the sick one.
You know everthing for me has got his resent.It is not easy for me talking that matter in English so sorry if i make lots of wrongs,and sorry that i cant explain you everything what is going thru my mind for this matter.I cant say that i agree with the one ore the other.
 
I think euthanasia is a good idea if practiced properly. I think that as long as we can prove that the person actually wants to die, and has a legitimate reason for doing so (i.e. - a terminal illness, a sharp decline in cognitive abilities to the point where one can no longer properly function, etc), no real harm will come of it. The laws would have to be very strict on who should be allowed to use this service though. I don't believe, say, a 35 year old man who is physically and mentally healthy should be allowed to use it just because he is depressed. I know that depression can be a mental illness, but I don't quite mean that kind of healthy. I more or less mean that he has a fully functional brain.

There are many benefits, as were stated above by numerous people, the most common one being the end of suffering from a terminal illness.

There are a few flaws however (aside from the religious standpoint). Where to draw the line for example. What about someone who, say, no longer can control their bowels due to a natural decline in health from the aging process? Sure it is embarrassing, and makes it difficult to lead a normal life, but could that be enough to allow you to be considered for the process? Where would we cut it off at? If we gave anyone who wanted to die the legal right to do so without any restrictions, we would have a massive and sudden decline in the Earth's population. Not that that, in itself, is necessarily a bad thing, but that's a completely different topic altogether.

I guess where I'm going with this is that while I think euthanasia should be legal, I think that first we should really take some time in determining who should be allowed to use it, and who shouldn't.
 
Last edited:
Only God should decide when one dies? Where would you ever get such a silly misconception?

Let me tell you a small tale, about a man named Kevin. I liked Kevin quite a bit, he had it out for God in a big way, because Kevin had bought a cat. The very day he got his cat, it got loose from his house, was scared by a loud noise, and ran into the street, where it was hit by a truck and killed. Crazy coincidence, the kind that some could attribute only to a Divine Being.

Kevin blamed God for this, saying that if God saved others, why did he not have the power to save his cat? Why had God allowed the cat to die, if it had ran out into the street a few seconds later, it would have been fine. But Kevin somehow thought that God had arranged it so that the cat would be scared by the noise just at the right time so that the truck would strike and kill it.

Kevin vowed that on Judgement Day, when he was face to face with God, he would pull out the stiff, dead cat from a bag and present it to God and ask why.

Well, I struck a deal with Kevin. I allowed him to meet and ask God one question, in exchange for his immortal soul.

Sure enough, Kevin asked God why his cat had died.

Do you know what God told him? He said, and I quote, "Your cat died because she was stupid."
 
Faith is not a basis for real life decisions. If a man is a coward and doesn't want to confront the inevitability of oblivion then belief in god is a handy shelter. It even has a potential benefit for those weak fools who can't stand the idea of real death: they don't run around frightened and scared all day.

But it is not the basis for sound international policy. America should not invade Iran to make Jesus come back so he can duke it out with the 12th imam.

It is also not a legitimate basis for bioethics. Belief in god is a confession of intellectual failure and personal weakness. It doesn't have to mean you're a frikkin nut, yet that is the inevitable conclusion of people who are going to base their life-choices and nation's policies on the same intellectual bankruptcy and personal cowardice that subsume the definition of the word "faith."
 
Crash said:
Faith is not a basis for real life decisions. If a man is a coward and doesn't want to confront the inevitability of oblivion then belief in god is a handy shelter. It even has a potential benefit for those weak fools who can't stand the idea of real death: they don't run around frightened and scared all day.

But it is not the basis for sound international policy. America should not invade Iran to make Jesus come back so he can duke it out with the 12th imam.

It is also not a legitimate basis for bioethics. Belief in god is a confession of intellectual failure and personal weakness. It doesn't have to mean you're a frikkin nut, yet that is the inevitable conclusion of people who are going to base their life-choices and nation's policies on the same intellectual bankruptcy and personal cowardice that subsume the definition of the word "faith."
Click to expand...
I think you either posted this in the wrong thread or are a fucking Atheist
 
Crash said:
Faith is not a basis for real life decisions. If a man is a coward and doesn't want to confront the inevitability of oblivion then belief in god is a handy shelter. It even has a potential benefit for those weak fools who can't stand the idea of real death: they don't run around frightened and scared all day.

But it is not the basis for sound international policy. America should not invade Iran to make Jesus come back so he can duke it out with the 12th imam.

It is also not a legitimate basis for bioethics. Belief in god is a confession of intellectual failure and personal weakness. It doesn't have to mean you're a frikkin nut, yet that is the inevitable conclusion of people who are going to base their life-choices and nation's policies on the same intellectual bankruptcy and personal cowardice that subsume the definition of the word "faith."
Click to expand...

See, that's the thing. Faith is a basis for many people's real life decisions. Because you choose to not accept this does not in any way deny it, it just makes you out to be narrow minded, and a bit of a drag. Loosen up a bit, and try to actually debate issues rather than making them a vehicle for your personal tirades that frankly I doubt few people really care about.
 
Lucifer Morningstar said:
See, that's the thing. Faith is a basis for many people's real life decisions. Because you choose to not accept this does not in any way deny it, it just makes you out to be narrow minded, and a bit of a drag. Loosen up a bit, and try to actually debate issues rather than making them a vehicle for your personal tirades that frankly I doubt few people really care about.
Click to expand...

Reason does not accept faith, because the whole concept of it is unreasonable. Pushing one's faith onto others and as such into the public scene is a bad move, and Crash is right on that.

By faith, we mean religious belief in this context. You cannot seriously argue tat something so utterly irrational should be a base for real life decisions and actions, can you?
 
Mod Note: QuickSilver, hold your tongue. You've been warned for swearing in the past, and you obviously haven't learnt from your mistakes. Also, no more liners in this thread, or you will be warned.
 
Judge Rulia said:
Mod Note: QuickSilver, hold your tongue. You've been warned for swearing in the past, and you obviously haven't learnt from your mistakes. Also, no more liners in this thread, or you will be warned.
Click to expand...

QuickSilverD said:
I think you either posted this in the wrong thread or are a fucking Atheist
Click to expand...
Oppose them or not, there will be no tolerance for senseless bashing of anyone elses beliefs [or non-beliefs, as the case is for Atheists].
 
Riku said:
Oppose them or not, there will be no tolerance for senseless bashing of anyone elses beliefs [or non-beliefs, as the case is for Atheists].
Click to expand...
To be fare, he had an actitude, I really don't care if you believe in God or not, but at least show some respect
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top