The Instigator
Pro (for)
The Contender
Con (against)

Assisted suicide should be allowed

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
Plasmawipes has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/6/2016 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 602 times Debate No: 97698
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (8)
Votes (0)




By accepting this debate, you realize that-
1. This is a controversial topic, relax and let's have a nice debate

2. I will be arguing for the legalization of Assisted suicide

3. BIASED and UNRELIABLE sources are not allowed (philosophy, statistics, logic, and everything else is allowed.)

4. Clearly label parts of your debate speech so your points are understandable.

5. Finally, just so we both know what we are getting into, your first post or argument would be accepting these terms and the stance that you have chosen.

Thank you for your time,

- Faust


Hello i accept.
Debate Round No. 1


Thank you for accepting this debate, and now I will begin.

STANCE - Assisted suicide should be allowed

it is an escape for people with no hope and it is also merciful.

EXPLANATION- We all know that there are many terrible things that can happen to a person where there is no hope such as being in a vegetative state, living on life support, etc. Logically and ethically, if the person in question has lost hope, they are in pain, etc. They should be allowed to make that decision. Also because it would be allowed by the state for terminal patients, the methods of death would be painless and peaceful.

It releases resource burdens that otherwise would be used to keep those people alive, and helps loved ones move one.

EXPLANATION- Being a terminal patient, hooked on life support, etc could become costly for both the hospital and the loved ones of the person in question. By all means, money expenses should not keep anybody from continuing to fight but when the disease in question TERMINAL it is the best choice available. It helps the family of the person in question move on in terms of debt that only serves as a reminder of the person they have lost, and it could also help the hospitals tend to people with a fighting chance.

At the end of the day, it's not your choice and you don't have to participate in killing a family member or even proposing the idea.

At the end of the day, it's not your choice to make, if somebody is of sound state and mind (and there is recorded evidence of them wanting to go through with said plan), they should be allowed to make that decision on their own. The fact is that this is optional and not mandatory, so you can continue with things as they are, but allowing this would also allow people to have another option even if it is bittersweet.

Conclusion -
All in all, for all of the reasons stated above, I strongly affirm or am for assisted suicide legalization.

Here is the law that I propose for people that want to go through with assisted suicide -
(This is a plan that I have the choice to propose)
  1. The person in question must be an adult, and of sound mind, if not, the decision can be handed to a trusted family member or friend
  2. The case must be examined by officials to decide if there are alternatives.
  3. There needs to be 100% confirmation recorded that the person giving permission to go through with assisted suicide wants to do so.
  4. Finally, the method of death needs to be painless and peaceful, because these people have not committed a crime (Ex. Lethal Injection)

Again thank you for participating, and I am eager to hear your response.

This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by FaustThe21st 1 year ago
No I mean cases in where there is HOPE for a better alternative, no cases of suicide shouldn't be taken seriously, I believe, you. I am sorry that I worded that wrong. I was just trying to say that people that aren't terminally ill would not be allowed to kill themselves. I am sorry for offending you . If there no is no sufficient reason for suicide, continue to live.
Posted by GrimlyF 1 year ago
FAUST. Was your remark re "frivolous" meant for me?. There was a mistake in my post regarding the country which was the Netherlands not Sweden but I assure you it is true. In Sweden ( I checked ) 2 women were aided in death, neither of them terminally ill or in great pain. The women were respectively 102 and 87 and their reason for suicide was they believed they had lived long enough and wished to die. The interesting points in all 3 examples are not simply the morality but the precedent. It seems that a wish to die is becoming a sufficient reason for suicide.
Posted by FaustThe21st 1 year ago
Fair points, but I think you didn't read my case.

No you should not go to asylums, and let people kill themselves, why? Because they have an alternative, and in my debate case, I provided a plan that would go along with legalization. If there is an alternative solution, there would be no suicide taking place. If you can do something to help yourself, then the assisted suicide would not take place according to the plan that I've provided.

Secondly, if the person in question has a mental illness the approval of the action taking place would need to be fulfilled by a trusted friend.

Nature is different than society. But since you provided an example in nature, the scorpion stings itself when there is no hope of escape. The buffalo can fight still because it still has hope of escape even with a broken leg. But is somebody corners a scorpion or traps them in a glass (it's common practice in the middle east) it stings itself because there is no hope of escape.

Pain is the brain's response to harm, but what do you do when you can't do anything about it.
Posted by IamAnIndependant 1 year ago
So, you're ok with giving suicidal people a knife? So we should just go to all the asylums and people who are suicidal and just give them a knife. Better yet, why not get the government to just euthanize them? They want to die, the government can help, boom. There you go.

Anyone who wants to commit suicide is mentally ill. And we shouldn't help the mentally ill by giving them a knife or a pistol. Virtually all animals even when barely alive still fight to live even in pain. A buffalo gets it leg snapped by an alligator, it doesn't just give in and die, because organisms have a desire naturally to live no matter what even if there is pain. Pain is your body saying DO SOMEHTHING TO SAVE YOURSELF not do something to kill yourself.
Posted by FaustThe21st 1 year ago
If you read my case I specifically try to eliminate frivolous cases by saying that assisted suicide cases should be reviewed before they take place. So cases like the ones you stated would not happen, but thank you for your insight.
Posted by GrimlyF 1 year ago
I am in favour of assisted suicide in cases of painful terminal illness and all the usual moral reasons but I read a news story this week on B.B.C. news. A Swedish hospital aided in the assisted suicide of a man not because he was dying, or in agonising pain, but because he was an alcoholic. The man had been in rehab 21 times but couldn't stop drinking. He went through the courts and gained permission to end his life because he couldn't bear to live as he was. I think the morallity of this action is questionable.
Posted by FaustThe21st 1 year ago
I can fix that just a sec
Posted by Benshapiro 1 year ago
"Assistant" or "assisted"?
This debate has 4 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.