The Instigator
Almusha
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
DoctorDeku
Con (against)
Winning
16 Points

Should euthanasia be legalized?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 3 votes the winner is...
DoctorDeku
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/15/2013 Category: Health
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,310 times Debate No: 29212
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (3)

 

Almusha

Pro

I think that euthanasia should be legalized because keeping people alive costs a lot of money, which could be used to save other people's lives.
DoctorDeku

Con

First and foremost, I ask the voters to be mindful that the time period of this debate is only 30 minutes per round. Therefore if either my opponent or I end up timing out, I ask that this not be a voting issue in the debate (I have class at 3).

That said, as a firm advocate for the value of life I am glad to negate this resolution. And advocacy for the Con rests on a few basic principles,

First: Life has intrinsic value-
The reason that doctors and nurses choose to pursue a career in medicine in the first place is that they care about their patients and they want to do all they can to take care of them. To affirm such a thing as euthanasia and call medicine is to spit in the face of medicine.

Life is valuable as it cannot be replicated. Of course new life can be created, and new people will be born but once an individual life is lost it's gone for good. They same is not true with money or resources, which can be replicated ad used to save lives.

Second: Valuing one life over another is abhorred-
My opponent argued that the money saved by committing euthanasia could be used to save other lives, however this fundamentally values one life over another. This is not alright as it places a value on human life and concludes that certain individuals are more deserving of life than another.

I will make the assumption that my opponent means to argue that older people should be euthanized; however the life of the elderly is just as valuable as the life of anyone else.

Finally: There is no compelling reason to vote Pro-
In his constructive, Pro fails to fully warrant his argument that euthanasia should be legalized. Why should money be valued more than human life? Why should we value one person's life over that of another. At the point this question is not answered, then the pro has failed to warrant their stance. On the counter, even given my limited time frame I have provided several arguments to warrant a vote for the Con as well as pointed out the flaws in the Pro position.

Vote Con!
Debate Round No. 1
Almusha

Pro

Almusha forfeited this round.
DoctorDeku

Con

Extend :O

Also as a note to the votes, I will more likely than not be timing out in the next round. If my opponent comes back and posts in that round I will link my refutations in the comments (of course limited to 8000 characters); if not well, pretend this was just a one round debate.
Debate Round No. 2
Almusha

Pro

Almusha forfeited this round.
DoctorDeku

Con

DoctorDeku forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by brian_eggleston 4 years ago
brian_eggleston
I think a terminally-ill patient knows their family are impatient to get their hands on their inheritance when the patient receives gift vouchers for the Dignitas clinic in Switzerland from them!
Posted by brian_eggleston 4 years ago
brian_eggleston
Pro's argument was that doctors should be allowed to take their patients' lives because it saves money - nice!
Posted by DoctorDeku 4 years ago
DoctorDeku
So my opponent has timed out and the system won't let me post my round; that said here's what I would have said

- Vote Con.
Posted by DoctorDeku 4 years ago
DoctorDeku
It isn't letting me respond D:
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Ike-Jin-Park 4 years ago
Ike-Jin-Park
AlmushaDoctorDekuTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro forfeited when Con was giving a proper argument.
Vote Placed by Xerge 4 years ago
Xerge
AlmushaDoctorDekuTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con had a more in-depth case on why euthanasia should not be legalized. The forfeits leave Con's case unanswered also.
Vote Placed by tmar19652 4 years ago
tmar19652
AlmushaDoctorDekuTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: ff