The Instigator
Locke1
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Truin
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Euthanasia should be legalized

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/2/2012 Category: Health
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,160 times Debate No: 24016
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

Locke1

Pro

I will argue that euthanasia (or assisted suicide) should be legalized. My main arguments will be that it is the individual's, not the state's, right to decide whether one should die or not and that it is inhuman to prolong the suffering of those that are fatally and painfully ill by preventing them from making the choice to die quickly.

I present the model. Euthanasia clinics where the patients can make the unpressured choice whether to die. The patients would be subjected to proffesional phsycological tests to determine their mental state and would be killed by an injection of pentobarbitol which is a tried and tested drug for human euthanasia.

I eagerly await a challenger.
Truin

Con

I accept my rivals challenge.

My argument will consist of the point that a government has the right to protect its citizens from all dangers including oneself. This is why those that attempt suicide are often ordered to therapy.
Debate Round No. 1
Locke1

Pro

First of all thank you for accepting this debate.

I will start by addressing Con's main argument, being that it is the government's right to protect citizens from all danger including themselves.
Any situation that would force a person to consider euthanasia (extreme physical or mental suffering) as their only viable option would already be defined as a danger to the citizen in question, both to their mental health and well-being. Euthanasia in this case is not a danger to the person, but rather the only means of release from an otherwise inescapable situation. So by Con's argument the government would be require to provide euthanasia as an option to these people to protect them from the danger that they are facing.

Also those that require therapy after attempted suicide are most often people suffering from some mental problem, example; depression. As I stated in my model, those seeking euthanasia would be subjected to professional psychological tests to determine that the patient is in a fit state to make the decision for euthanasia.

I'll move on to my main point, which is that it is the right of the individual, not the government, to decide how and when one should die. Already the government accepts our right to slowly kill ourselves by smoking and drinking. This is because the government understands that the we have the right to live our lives in any manner we choose, so long as it does not impact on the lives of others. The logical next step is to allow citizens to decide the time and the manner of their death. The people requesting euthanasia would take psychological tests to determine they are in a fit state of metal health and family opinions would be observed. We allow people to live their lives as they want so why shouldn't we allow them to die when they wish? There is no reason.
Truin

Con

Truin forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Locke1

Pro

Wow, that was quick.
I guess I win.
Truin

Con

Truin forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.