Should Euthanasia Be Legal?

For most people the topic of death can be very disheartening or painful to talk about not only in regards to their own death, but in regards to that of a loved one, family member, or even a friend, so generally they try to steer clear of that particular subject. However if euthanasia is brought up into the conversation views change and people want to make their voices and opinions heard, especially when it is in regards to their religious beliefs about the matter, sometimes it just sparks a flame deep down inside of an individual that they did not even realize they had. Euthanasia is, “the act or practice of killing hopelessly sick or injured individuals (as persons or domestic animals) in a relatively painless way for reasons of mercy.”(www.merriam-webster.com). The majority of most religions are against euthanasia because they feel as though it goes against their beliefs, Roman Catholics, Judaism, Islam, Buddhist and Protestant just to name a few. There are plenty of reasons why these religious groups feel so strongly about euthanasia each has their own view on the matter, but they come together to an understanding about this topic. The major reasons why they feel as if euthanasia violates a religious standpoint is that collectively these groups feel that only God has the power to take life away, it devalues human life, it is seen as murder or even suicide and religious scripture has taught against a person or another person ending someone’s life.

Because all men were created in the image of God (Gen1: 26), the disabled and the weak shouldn't be pushed from society. In addition, from the Bible you can clearly see that Jesus goes to the ones that are physically or mentally weak and therefore the elderly should be helped to live a normal life. Some Christians regard active euthanasia as murder, and the Roman Catholics regard euthanasia as ' a grave violation of the law of God' because it breaks the rule:' You shall not kill' (Exodus 20:30). Some Christians would disagree with active euthanasia but support the idea of dying with dignity, by setting up hospices like St. Christopher's hospice.

Euthanasia is argued to be defined as depriving of life or causing the death of a living being. A primary and controversial component to euthanasia is the idea that the physicians are acting in “God” like form. Christians are thought to believe that “thou shall not kill.” Christians believe that all human beings have been in created in God’s image and should be cherished in all circumstances. However, according to the article written by Ann-Marie Begley, she explains, “if only God can end a life, then clearly all instances of killing are wrong, including killing in war and self defense” (Begley 300). The only way this philosophy can be upheld is with complete pacifism in which most Christians would not agree with. The other argument opposing euthanasia is the concern about the perceived public role of the physician. The metaphorical stance of doctors seen around the country is that they are the ‘enemies of death.’ The fear is that the image would be eroded resulting in the lost of trust within the public. Ann-Marie Begley explains, “the trust does not rest with the cure and healing but with the compassion and a recognition that there comes a time when the healer has reached the limits of his or her ability” (Begley 303). The argument of depriving someone of life is also seen in equivalence to murder. Scholars also differentiate murder from euthanasia in that euthanasia there is no malice

In a momentous decision released February 6, 2015, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that Physician-assisted suicide will be legal in Canada within 12 months. This deci-sion has caused a myriad of controversy. Opponents of physician-assisted suicide argue that the constitution recognizes the sanctity of life and no one has the right to end the life of another person’s. Supporters, on the other hand, argue that patients who experience constant pain and misery due to health issues must be allowed to have the right to die with dignity of their own choices. This means it is necessary for the government to take measures to protect the right of those people who suffer. Though both arguments offer val-id points, it is absolutely crucial that all human beings should be entitled the essential right to be painlessly and safely relieved of suffering caused by incurable diseases.

Having the right to life, also gives one the right to death. Outrageously, physician assisted suicide is illegal in all but five states in the U.S; including California, Montana, Oregon, Washington, and Vermont; this law, violating rules of ethics, also defies morals. Some actions in the past, including women not having voting rights, and experimentation on prisoners and the mentally ill, also infringed upon ethics and morale. Women not being permitted to vote before the 19th Amendment--Women’s Suffrage Act--opposed the logic of equality, likewise, experiments on prisoners and the mentally incompetent violated the 8th Amendment prohibiting cruel and unusual punishment (“CRS Annotated Constitution”). One cannot help but wonder, will physician assisted suicide be legal in all states, a century from now? Because people in America are given the right to LIFE, liberty, and property, they should also be given the choice of ending their pain more swiftly.

The debate on legalizing assisted suicide is an issue across the globe. It has brought countries to contemplate on the legalities of the matter in their respective legislative branches of government. Assisted suicide is just simply a matter of assessing one's will to perform such act with the permission of the subject or the patient in such way his will be done. The debate now focuses on either the act shall be legalized or not.

Euthanasia, originating from the Greek word for “good death,” is the act or practice of ending the life of a terminally ill person (Webster’s Dictionary). Euthanasia is the process in which speeds up death for terminally ill patients who are suffering in pain physically and mentally. Euthanasia has been legal in the state of Washington since 2009 and is also currently legal in the states of Montana, Oregon and in the countries of the Netherlands and Luxemburg.

Millions of precious lives have been deliberately taken throughout the world due to the new Euthanasia Law. Euthanasia is the practicing of assisted suicide, due to terminally ill patients or depression. The practicing has just been legalized September 2015, and will be put into effect in California January 1 2016. Although, it is still being argued if adolescents should have the right fro this and if it’s morally correct all together. Euthanasia should be illegal throughout the world, because people shouldn’t be the ones to decide their own death.

In this article, Perry reviews the advantages of enforcing euthanasia with the injured military personnel during the war. The author was stored information from former troops, who have experienced the war. This information is mostly the story of the soldiers who was wounded torture in the war, and the fellow soldiers decided to assassinate that soldier, who then lost the pain. His research focuses on the thoughts of the former military personnel about mercy killings. The article is useful to my research topic, as Perry suggests that there are numerous reasons for enforcing mercy killings to the soldiers with the intractable circumstances. The main limitation of the article is that the research was too narrow because it lacks opinions and aspects

Euthanasia is assisted suicide, helping someone to end their own life when they are suffering from a terminal or debilitating illness. When thinking about euthanasia the popular physician Dr. Jack Kevorkian comes to mind, this doctor was jailed for helping one hundred and thirty patients to end their lives by administering a concoction of powerful medications S. Tanenbaum (2015). This case had sparked widespread controversy and debate about ethical and legal ramifications of helping patients to end their life. Ultimately Dr. Jack Kevorkian was convicted of murdering one patient and was sentenced to eight years in prison for his crime S. Tanenbaum (2015). I think if someone is facing a painful and dramatically life altering illness that will

There are many arguments both for and against euthanasia. Many faith groups within Christian, Muslim, Jewish and other religions believe that God gives life and therefore only God should take it away. Suicide would then be considered an interference of God's plan for that individual. Therefore, such groups argue that the patient should continue living and suffering until God decides otherwise. Some religious extremist groups take this idea to the extent that they will not seek medical treatment for any condition at all.

Today, the resolution for the debate is “Let it be resolved that euthanasia should be morally permissible for the disabled and children”. To begin with, one must comprehend the essence of “euthanasia” and “morally permissible” to follow the arguments in this debate. According to the Oxford Dictionary, euthanasia is “the painless killing of a patient suffering from an incurable and painful disease or in an irreversible coma”. Whereas, morally permissible according to Deni Elliot, in her book “Ethics the First Person” means the “behaviour that is tolerated by the moral system”. With regards to Euthanasia, it is classified as active and passive. In layman’s terms, “Active Euthanasia” is when the immediate result of death is not from the patient’s disease but a medical action was done to result their death such as providing a lethal drug. In the other hand, “Passive Euthanasia” is when the death is caused by the patient’s disease which enables to advance naturally without any influence of treatment which might prolong the patients’ life. As I have stated my clarifications, I am hereby to present three arguments within the PRO side of the debate.

Euthanasia is often called “mercy killing”. It is intentionally making someone die, rather than allowing that person to die naturally. It is sometimes the act of ending someone’s life, who is terminally ill, or is suffering in severe pain. Euthanasia is mostly illegal in the world today. Euthanasia can be considered a form of suicide, if the person afflicted with the problem actively does it. The person volunteering to commit the act to that person can also consider it a form of murder.

This raises the question, is euthanasia murder? and in many Christian’s view is that if a life is taken away earlier than God planed then it is murder and therefore many Christian’s point of view on euthanasia is that it is wrong.

In current times we have made many technological advances that have boosted the medical productivity in hospitals. However, the rapid development of medicine is far from being a long term resolve for many health issues. We have a plethora of people whose quality of life is very low and has no chance of improving. During these situations allowing the person to end their life via euthanasia should be allowed. I will argue that Euthanasia is morally permissible in some cases because there are several moral justifications that argue for ending one’s life.