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

Should Euthanasia 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  
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: 10/28/2015 Category: Health
Updated: 10 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,036 times Debate No: 81696
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)




Euthanasia is killling people who are having cancer, and many other extreme diseases. Euthanasia is controversial because some people think it is not ethical, and opponents argue that Euthanasia is helping people have a less painful death. I'm here to oppose Euthanasia, and I'll post the basic rules of this debate


1. Round 1
-introducing statement
2. Round 2
-your whole arguments(3 supports)+Previous Round Rebuttals
3. Round 3
4. Round 4
-Rebuttal 2
5. Round 5
-Concluding statement+Main Rebuttal( Rebuttal 3)

The most important rule : NO FORFEITING!


we should allow euthanasia of those living tortured lives.

why euthanasia is the moral solution in this situation:
-most people's biggest fear isn't death... it's pained living. that's why the "torture" debate is so gut wrenching and passion filled.
-we understand intuitiely that we should put dog's "out of their misery", as the humane thing to do. why with people is it suddenly inhumane? there is some merit to claiming people aren't dogs and have a higher dignity... but this argument about dignity could even more easily be used the other way, it's all the more reason to be humane and "put them out of their misery", espeically when we are thinking it's about humane activity etc to begin with in the one situation.
-liberty. at best this is a tough issue. why do we let the government decide who's right in a tough issue, when the person this is affecting most could be the decider?
Debate Round No. 1


Well, sorry for the wait in Round 2. Before moving on to my main point, I'd like to rebut the pro speaker.

Proposition speaker said that most people's biggest fear is pained living so 'torture' debate remains. However, diseases that are painful and torturing people such as criminals are different. Diseases causes by germs, bacterias, etc. Getting diseases are not a fault of a patient. Well, 'Who will like to be sick?'. However, torture is different. Criminals only get torture or people who did actions out of ethics or a country's law. Thus, you could behave well and follow the ethics of a country, then you would not get torture.

Now moving on to my main point

I believe that we should not allow euthanasia.

First, it violates human rights. To illustrate, in law, it says that we should never kill people in any ways, any reasons. But, euthanasia's purpose is making a comfortable 'death'. As a result, it is killing people. It could help for having a comfortable death but it is out of law. Also, religions believe humans should not suicide or die before prepared death. Euthanasia are dying before prepared death. However, Euthanasia should not be allowed.

Second, it is not a comfortable death. Oftenly, the patients who are having euthanasia are cancer patients, and old people. Therefore, their mental is weak. They would worry about their death. Well, even if you die early you had already experienced the pain of cancer, etc. On the other hand, if you not do euthanasia you could live longer. Well, isn't it the same?

Finally, euthanasia is not an honorable death. People also think life as one of the valuable things they think. Why is euthanasia is an honorable death? An example of honorable death is a general won in a big war and widen a territory or a king who developed a country. The famous example is Alexander the Great.

Well, this is the end of Round 2. Good Luck!


con misses the point with the torture comment. my only point was pained living is similar to torture... we dont like torture, we don't like pained living. at any rate, con didn't say how it's okay to just ignore pained living.

con's points about comfortable death, those paragraphs are so poorly written it is hard to follow.

con says euthanasia is not hornorable. i say that's the the person himself to decide. one could find honor in dying, finding it mroe dignified for them.

con didn't really address the "dog out of its misery" point. or my other points all that well.
Debate Round No. 2


lewis25 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3


Well, sorry for the forfeit and thank you for waiting me to post my argument. Well, sorry again and please let me start.

First, I will answer your rebuttal.

-Sorry for misunderstanding your metaphor. However, does human beings have the right to control their death time?
Well, you didn't borned because you wanted to be borned. It's just natural. Death is also the same.

-The meant of euthanasia is not a comfortable death is because it doesn't matters with the patient's purpose because they have no consciousness.

-The second point of answer also rebuts your third rebuttal. You said that person himself or herself has the right to decide. But, people who does euthanasia are having brain death and could not speak. Therefore, only the patient's family has the right to decide. Therefore, the pro speaker's logic was slightly wrong.

-Well, I can't identify your opinion on Round 2


i'm not going to try to wade through that grammar and logic minefield. i'll just reiterate my points
Debate Round No. 4


lewis25 forfeited this round.


dairygirl4u2c forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by lewis25 11 months ago
Well, umm. both Pro speaker and this person who had commented thank you for saying that my Grammar is actually 'Poorly Bad'. Well, excuse me, but I was always bad at grammar. But, in this chance I will like to try to improve my Grammar skills. (I hope I didn't have any Grammar mistakes even in this comment)
Posted by 5runhomerun 11 months ago
I'm sorry con I'm against you but your grammar sucks and makes it hard to follow and your points are kinda weak. You seem nice though:).
No votes have been placed for this debate.