The Instigator
yunsta
Pro (for)
Winning
2 Points
The Contender
will031
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

is killing someone with their knowledge murder?

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 2 votes the winner is...
yunsta
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/26/2016 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 299 times Debate No: 87291
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)

 

yunsta

Pro

Should involuntary euthanasia be valid at any point?

Involuntary euthanasia befalls when euthanasia is executed on a person who in their own rights has provided none whatsoever informed consent, either because they do not choose to die, or because they were not asked. This issue has been put to question multiple occupations resulting in religious fanatics shoving the Bible down our throats and ranting on about gods plan; however, sometimes there is really nothing we can do about it. Personally, I find active euthanasia quite similar to abortion, just a more live version. Having a brain dead, or incredibly sick child with no future possibility would rather cause quite a hassle where child euthanasia comes to light as an option. This is the only case involuntary euthanasia is justified upon my eyes. Although some may doubt the fact, that it"s "playing god" deciding whether someone should die or live which is reasonable considering the circumstances however, would you rather live or witness someone you love live in misery. There has been some statistics release on euthanasia in Netherlands stating that 2,300 people died upon patient"s wishes in comparison to 1,040 people died from involuntary euthanasia, which would add to an average of 3 deaths per day in which 14% of these patients were fully competent and 72% had never given any indication that they would want their lives terminated.

Although it may seem wrong, I still believe that involuntary euthanasia is acceptable in strong cases, where the patients have no chance of recovery or is extremely sick.

Sources:
http://www.patientsrightscouncil.org.........
http://www.lifenews.com.........
will031

Con

I am happy to debate this topic with you. this is my first debate so I hope it's a good one. ( please excuse my grammar )

I am going to start with quoting what you said "Although it may seem wrong, I still believe that involuntary euthanasia is acceptable in strong cases, where the patients have no chance of recovery or is extremely sick." "Even if you said although it may be wrong" I think that in no case should killing should be acceptable. Let's just say that the victim really has no chance of survival or recovery, that doesn't mean you could show up and shoot him/her point blank. Instead of killing the person, let him/her live the rest of it's life. Even if he has less thank a week to live. Now if we want to bring up a another example we could do that. Let's say a member of a family is a terrorist and he/she dies, do you think that cause on member is a terrorist the whole family has to die too? In my opinion if the whole family was influenced then they probably should. If they didn't know that then no. That's all i'm going to say for this round:)
Debate Round No. 1
yunsta

Pro

Thanks for agreeing to this debate. This is also my first debate.

You have completely degraded my point that we are debating about involuntary euthanasia. We live in a society where murderers get murdered with capital punishment, and abortion is legal, so why shouldn"t involuntary euthanasia be legal too? I believe that life has a value, and a brain dead individual who lives under guidance every day, who cannot help themselves or others might be happier in a better place. Maybe even a cancer patience that has lost all meaning to live, who is constantly living and breathing with pain in their lungs and tears in their eyes might also be willing to enter a pain-free world and agree to euthanasia. Although that might seem off topic, it is still under the same type of concept as we need to open up to these type of situations. A single mom with a brain dead could be struggling to look after her child, and balancing her life might find it appropriate that her son/daughter enter a better place, and parents should have the right to under valid reason. This type of issue can be linked back into abortion as it follows the same concept, that the so-called child does not have a say in it.

However, I also believe that a parent can only make their decision while the child is legally under their guidance, not after he/she is passed a legal age.
will031

Con

I do not know how you can compare capital punishment to euthanasia, as capital punishment is punishment for a crime has committed so unless you want to compare brain dead people etc. to criminals this argument is invalid. Abortion is again another story as it is an unborn still developing not necessarily living object who has never lived life or anything a long those lines. A person who has become brain dead still has people that are emotionally attached to the person and who firmly believe in him maybe getting better some day. In round one you talked about the bible being shoved down our throats without giving an example to when this has happened, further more you are only pointing out Christians even though this is a topic in all major monotheistic religions such as Judaism and Islam.

Really this is a topic that comes down to morals, and I believe that unless the person explicitly asked to be euthanize d it is not a decision that should be made by others or we might as well start killing retards and other people who cannot speak up for themselves.
Debate Round No. 2
yunsta

Pro

First of all, I compared capital punishment to justify the fact that our society values life to an extent to where it's necessary to get rid of someone. Abortion is murdering a child, regardless of whether you see it as a baby or not, it still follows the same principle. So why is abortion acceptable with 0 reasoning and involuntary euthanasia not with all the reasons in the world?
If the parents have strong emotional attachment to the child they would not volunteer to put their son/daughter through involuntary euthanasia. I feel that money and resources can go to a better purpose to justifying how we can tackle issues such brain dead, instead of wasting up to 1,500 dollars a day to put someone who, we know is never going to make a full recovery.
So who if we are a society that supports abortion without any reasoning, why can't we also support involuntary euthanasia on strong cases where there isn't any chance of recovery?

sources:

http://www.medpagetoday.com...
will031

Con

will031 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by fire_wings 1 year ago
fire_wings
yunstawill031Tied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: ff
Vote Placed by U.n 1 year ago
U.n
yunstawill031Tied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture.