What are some reasons Assisted Suicide Should Be Legalized other than the persons right to die?
343399
The anguish is the big thing. The dying person knows there's no going back and then they continue to suffer. The family and friends also suffer. I know that if assisted suicide had been allowed for my cancer ridden grandfather I would have had better memories.\n\n\nWe do it to animals to be kind to them so why not do it to humans? If an animal has no quality of life then we are kind to it. If humans have no quality of life then why should they suffer.\n\nIt is already done in the medical profession. When my grandmother was dying from organ failure the doctor just kept uping her morphine so that she was in less pain but it would also end her suffering a lot earlier.\n\nDignity. My grandfather went through the war and everything and was a strong man. He was so embarrassed and undignified by his death that it cause him not to enjoy his remaining time.
1142564
Euthanasia is often an ethical choice, so long as it is the choice of the patient without undue pressure.\n\nThere are many aspects of our care system for the ill, disabled and elderly that require reworking to eliminate the undue pressure that might cause a patient to unnecessarily choose euthanasia when they might not otherwise make that choice.\nThese issues need to be addressed, then euthanasia should be legalized.\n\nKevorkian's freedom is problematic. Just choosing to violate the laws of a country cannot be freely sanctioned, and permitted, and he has said that he would continue physician assisted suicides.  He has served to point out the unfairness of our unjustifiable current situation.  Once the laws have been changed perhaps he could be officially pardoned.
546166
I think its wrong for the government to deny these people death. If it is the only possible alternative then let them go. Living puts them in much more agony and pain than death.\n\n\nBut those emo suicidal people need to get a grip.
418536
Go to: www.findarticles.com\nEnter: assisted suicide\n\nI came up with more than 1900 articles when I did this search.
332144
People are against suicide because it makes them feel bad. They selfishly think of themselves and how bad they will feel about it instead of thinking about ending the suffering of a loved one.
742725
1. Yes, I would. It would be nice to know I could help someone to live a better life.\n2. "ordinary means", to me, refer to routine, usual, natural procedures (such as dying of natural causes); "extraordinary means" refer to procedures that are not customary (unusual, unnatural, such as euthanasia);\n3. This is a tough question because it involves legal and religious issues. To me, euthanasia is somewhat similar to the death penalty in the sense that someone has (or will have) the legal right to end someone else's life. When I think of both issues, from a detached standpoint, it seems OK for a doctor to end a terminal patient´s life and for the State to "kill" a criminal by lethal injection. That's because I am not the one who will be responsible for those "death sentences". However, if a relative of mine were in a vegetative state and I would have to pull the plug (so to speak), seriously, I doubt I would do it. It´s a matter of principles. Long story short, even if it were "legal", deep down, it would still be "illegal". \n4. cf. no. 3.\n5. If I had to choose between the two, I would definitely prefer "active euthanasia". It breaks my heart when I think of Mary Schiavo. The way she was treated, to me, was inhumane.
225383
The higher purpose in permitting it is to affirm that every person should shall have full jurisdiction over what happens inside the boundaries of his/her body.  Therefore by permitting it we are acknowledging that the freedom of a person to control their own body is more important than other considerations.  However we are not endorsing the choices they make as "good".  We are merely choosing not to intervene forcefully in a person's excersise of thier soverign rights over their body.  In this light, persuasion and dialog become the tools of those who wish to stop the practice, not the threat of imprisonment or execution by the government (there are people out there who believe that it is murder and should be punished with death).  \n\nYour second question becomes irrelavent unless you believe that you or the government has a role in determining how a person should be permitted to exersise control over what goes on inside thier body.\n\nHuman sacrifice is ritualistic religious killing of a person in order to gain some favor with a God that they fear, in hopes that they will be granted some sort of boon from their god, such as good weather or reprieve from a plague.  I don't see how anyone would have an abortion to please God, but fervently religious people NEVER fail to surpirse me!
61277
Yes it is cruel to do that to a person. And I know that in Oregan, it is legal for a person to decide wheather or not they want to die. However, I don't know if its legal anywhere else. I think it should be, but lots of people look down on it as "assisted suicide".
227136
Well after the Supreme Court decided that assisted suicide is a states' rights issue, it is well with in the right of South Dakotans to elect representatives to pass this bill.  There sounds like there will be a referendum, but if the citizens of South Dakota votes for this what's going to happen those who don't like the fact that a state has decided what should be a states rights issue (the same as what Oregon did with assisted suicide) will take the state to court, instead of letting the state make it's own law guaranteed it according to the constitutions concept of implied powers.  Especially considering Roe didn't go through the legislature, but was usurped by the judiciary.\n\nIf the Supreme Court is going to be consistent they will say it's a states rights issue.
753106
Difficult to put an absolute age on it - some people are useful way past the age of 50, others are useless from the age of 15.\nBut why not voluntary Euthanasia - someone who's got nothing to live for but tea and Emmerdale, might "want" to take a trip to the other side, just to see if it's true, or not. But they're not allowed to.
1044548
I fully beleive that if someone wants to die, they should be able to do it. The governemnt's not going to stop me if I really want to commit suicide. Pain should be able to be stopped -- one way or another. Death is as good a way as others. \nBy the way...I really wish doctors actually did no harm.
960322
Only legislatures and the courts have control over what laws exist.\n\nAs far as euthanasia, no US states and very few countries allow it. Remember that euthanasia is different than assisted suicide. For euthanasia, the doctor (or whoever) takes the physical action that terminates the life. In assisted suicide, the doctor only provides the means, and the person ends their own life.\n\nIn the US, only Oregon currently has assisted suicide laws. The federal FDA tried to overrule the Oregon legislature, but the courts ruled that it was a matter for the Oregon voters, not the Attorney General, to decide.\n\nSo, as far as organizations that have control over whether one person is allowed to actively kill another, for whatever reason -- the hospital (if any), the state medical licensing board, the appropriate state legislature, and the federal government, in roughly that order. As far as assisted suicide, only the appropriate state legislature.
516119
America has had a debate over both issues for many years now.Sentencing persons to death for their crimes has been around for centuries.So has the practice of abortion dating back 5000 years or more.The whole debate is based on ones own morale beliefs.There lies the debate the struggle between the beliefs of individuals.It is a very hard decision to enforce the moral beliefs of one on another individual. If society as a whole can come to a consensus that no form of death of human life is acceptable or a that terminating a life is acceptable in abortion or in capital punishment.I wont insert my beliefs here but I do agree that there is a contradiction between the two.One human life needs to be viewed equally to another.
761572
it makes little sense.  the cost for "euthanasia" is minimal so there is no government support for this.  the question is broader and then it is merely ethical. If a doctor is pro-euthanasia it should be of no consequence for the government either way.
783688
Abolish the death penelty.\n\nNo country can rightiously talk of justice and terror, when it can legally murder its own citizens.
122673
How about a liberal answer this question?  The death penalty issue is so far removed from the abortion issue.\nThe right to choose is about a womans right to make decisions about her own body and nobody, especially the government, should have greater say over her.  Likewise, the government should not have the ability to end a life.  The main problem is that fact that people have be wrongly convicted and dna freed them.  And people have been scapegoated because they could not pin the crime on the truely guilty party.  I don't have ANY LOVE for killers, rapist, scum of any description.  I know that innocent people have gone to jail and we need to protect them.  If even one innocent person is slain we are all guilty of that murder.
898744
Yes, I think it should be abolished. Although our legal system is a relatively good one, I'm sure we have put innocent people to death. Many proponents of the death penalty often say that citizens should not have to shoulder the financial burden of feeding  and housing a criminal for the rest of his life, but the truth is that putting someone to death is even more expensive than keeping him alive.