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

Is euthanasia reasonable ?

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: 8/17/2012 Category: Society
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,375 times Debate No: 25158
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (0)




In this debate Round 1 is acceptance. Round 2 is main arguments.
Round 3 is rebuttal and conclusion.
Definition: (1) Euthanasia : It refers to the practice of intentionally ending a life in order to relieve pain and suffering. (
(2) Reasonable: Governed by or being in accordance with reason or
sound thinking. (
I hope someone who is interested in this topic will accept the debate.


Resolved: Euthanasia is reasonable.

I accept this debate.

While PRO's dictionary definition of "reasonable" is much too broad, I hope that through the second round, its context will become more precise. I'll leave my own definition of reasonable until my own argument in the next round.

To simply put, PRO needs to show WHY the benefits of euthanasia outweigh its disadvantages; vice versa for CON. Since PRO did not put any semantic-related limit on the word "reasonable," both sides will be allowed to argue for the various aspects of this issue - the practical, the moral, the social, and so on.

I look forward to a debate that is enlightening for both sides.
Debate Round No. 1


Con, I thank you for accepting the debate. I try to show why the benefits of euthanasia outweigh its disadvantages from a number of aspects of this problem.
Firstly, euthanasia contributes to liberating a patient from extrem pain. He or she has been suffering from physical pain and mental stress for a long time. They find it difficult to think, read and write every day. They can enjoy neither sports nor hobbies, as they used to. Moreover, a human being who can not express what he or she has to say in mind finds it difficult to communicate with others. Those conditions deprive of the meaning of life and hope from a human being.

Secondly, a patient who is required to choose euthanasia can not expect that he or she can live for a long time.
I believe many of them tend to receive a hospice care. It is ``a type of medical care provided to patients with terminal
illnesses who generally have less than six months to live. It is characterized as a philosophy of care during the end-of- life and provide care 24hours, seven days per week.``(
Therefore, they face a condition in accepting euthanasia without hesitation.

Thirdly, a patient and the family members must shoulder a heavy financial burden. Therefore, euthanasia contributes to reducing a large amount of health care costs for them.

Forthly, viewing from the management of a hospital ``the energy of docters and hospital beds could be used for people whose lives could be saved instead of continuing the life of those who want to die which increases the general quality of care and shortens hospital waiting lists.``(

Finally, from the religious and Christians point of view ``the Bible does not spcifically forbid or condone euthanasia.``
And ``our bodies belong to God, not us.``(

From above arguments I believe that each person should have the right to leave this earth with dignity without having a physical and mental hardship.

I am looking forward to reading the arguments of Con. Good luck.


Wordkill forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2


In this round I express my closing statement. I can not put up with seeing the condition, in which a patient is suffering from severe pain. He or she can not lead a higher quality of life. This means that a meaningful life is threatened.
``Since the 1970s, the term `quality of life` has been adopted by the pro-death movement, and its meaning has changed from `quality of life`to `quality of living` to the `quality of life` to the `value of life.`
These changes in meaning have promoted the belief that a life with low quality is not worth living. The result has been the inevitable conclusion that some people are less valuable than others. Such people are said to be `better off dead`or to have a `right to die.`(
In conclution, ``the word `euthanasia` comes from the Greek words Eu and Thanatos and means `happy death` or `good death.`(
Therefore, I believe that euthanasia is a reasonable decision.
Thank you for reading my arguments. Good luck.


Wordkill forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by YYW 5 years ago
It seems like this would be a resolution more appropriate to debate as a general rule, rather than on a case by case basis.
Posted by yuiru 5 years ago
it is so circumstantial though...
Posted by YYW 5 years ago
So essentially you want to argue that euthanasia is reasonable. And you want con to argue that it is not reasonable. How do we determine what is/is not reasonable?
Posted by ldcon 5 years ago
Seems a skewed debate. You're basically defending the positive applications of euthanasia without conceding where it might be exercised inappropriately.
Posted by adontimasu 5 years ago
Damn it! Why does everybody think euthanasia is good? D:
No votes have been placed for this debate.