Login/Sign Up




Should euthanasia be legal?
Politics

Joel Pålsson
Jul 16, 2015
10 votes
6 debaters
2


+ Add Argument

9
For


Joel Pålsson
Jul 16, 2015
2 convinced
Rebuttal
When I see old people with dementia or other kinds of troubles which makes them completely dependent on others and society, you know what I think?
"I don't want to become like that. I'd rather die.".

I'll give you the cold hard truth: At some point many of us just become a burden to society, our loved ones and our family. I don't want to become that, and I don't think other do either. It's time we stop talking about how old we can get, and start talking about how old we should get.

 
Steve Stephanson
Jul 16, 2015
0 convinced
Rebuttal
I vote For this Because we have the right too live, so we must have the right too die other wise the right too live is a duty not a right.

 
Aasif Essack
Aug 30, 2015
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: Akshay Sharma Show

But its not the doctors who decide whether or not to give the injection, its the patient. You could argue the fact that if someone is mentally disabled or in a coma, but its more to it. The patient is suffering and the cure to all diseases is death, not saying we should all die as we have a right to life, but don't you think we have a right to death if we are in pain and suffering?

 
+ Add Argument

1
Against


Kanha Batra
Aug 01, 2015
0 convinced
Rebuttal
I too believe in Euthanasia, but just for the sake of getting this debate going, I'll oppose.
(I'm new here, so I assume this is how things work.)

Firstly, just because a person has become a liability to the society, that does not mean that we now have the right to decide whether that person gets to live or not. Right To Live is one of the most fundamental ones, and if we decide to take matter into our own hands, no matter how emotionally correct we may feel that we are, we would be going against the judiciary itself.

Secondly, there is no distinct line as to who should be euthanized and who shouldn't. Dementia, full body paralysis, are just a few elements of the whole set. Some of these conditions can be treated to an extent. Some can be controlled to increase life expectancy. But there is no yardstick to compare which disease is fatal enough to permit euthanasia and which isn't. Thus, the whole system will crumble.

Next, if the person to be euthanised is in extreme discomfort : pain, hallucinations, self destruction, etc., then they are clearly not rational enough to make such an important decision for themselves anymore and thus should not have any say in the matter whatsoever.

Lastly, there is a clear slippery slope which follows this proposal. The masses will start believing that they can take any matter into their hands, and hence, vigilantism will be born. Furhtermore, we're one step away from euthanasia to killing people with incurable diseases (later stages of cancer, AIDS, Huntington's Disease, etc.). Just because a person leads a negative lifestyle doesn't mean we let him/her end it. We should instead take measures to create improvisation.

 
Akshay Sharma
Aug 13, 2015
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Euthanasia can be classified as active and passive and I am against the passive form of euthanasia because not only does it violate the doctor's oath but it also is vulnerable to misuse and we should't make wrong laws based on a few cases.

 
Calc Sad
Sep 05, 2015
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: Joel Pålsson Show

You said and I quote: "At some point many of us just become a burden to society, our loved ones and our family."

First of all, talking about the truth, the society doesn't care if one person dies of an illness. There are a lot more other things people are to be worried about.

Next is our loved ones and our family.
We actually never know if a person would die or not. For all we now, a miracle could happen and cure a sick person. Think about what the family that will be left mourning for their dead loved one that could have been alive.
Yes, it is not easy to see a person you care for in a hospital bed struggling to stay alive but would you rather see them in a casket?
It would never be a burden taking care of the sick if you truly love him/her.

 


Use these tags to find similiar debates

britain death government politics uk 2008 2009 9/11 abortion Afghanistan america Arizona AU bad Baha BBC bias Biden boycott Britain bush canada capitalism Censorship cheney children China Christianity church cia Clinton Cold War commonwealth communism Communist congress conservative conservatives conspiracy Constitution Corruption country crime death debate defeat Democracy democrat Democrats detention discrimination drugs economics economy education election elections Ethics EU Europe Euthanasia evil Fascism feminism Fight France Frankie freedom Freedom of speech freedoms french gay Gaza george bush Georgia global global warming goverment government Great Britain Guantanamo Bay guns Health Health Care Healthcare Hillary hillary clinton History Hitler homosexual human rights illegal illegal immigration immigration india iran Iranian presidential election iraq islam Israel japan Jewish juggernaut justice Karl law laws legal legislation liberal lies marijuana marriage mccain media Medicine mexico middle east military monarchy money moral morals Mugabe Muslim Muslims news North Korea nuclear nukes Obama objective Oil opression Osama pakistan Palestine Palin Panda paradox parliament peace petition philosophy policy politicians Politics polygamy power president Prime Minister prisoners protest Public Affairs punishment queen race racism religion republican Republicans revolution right rights Rove russia Saddam Sarkozy Security sex socialism Society South Korea sovereignty Supreme court tax taxes terror terrorism terrorist terrorists Tibet torture Troop U.S. uk un united nations united states us usa vancam vote Votes voting war washington weapons wmd women world wrong