1. Post #1
    Gold Member
    VistaPOWA's Avatar
    October 2008
    8,370 Posts
    Personally, I think that a man should be given the right to peacefully die to relieve pain and suffering, but it should be heavily regulated, and this decision should be only given to people who are terminally ill or very seriously injured.
    Another dilemma would be giving the right to let someone die to family members in case the man is not able to do this decision (he is in coma, he is not sane, etc).

    On the other hand, intensive therapy can ease the pain and the suffering and who knows, the terminal illness the person is suffering from could be cured the very next day. Also, legalizing euthanasia can lead to a slippery slope effect (learn more about it here).

    So, what do you think?

  2. Post #2
    HAND.CAT
    barttool's Avatar
    July 2010
    4,592 Posts
    I agree with OP, Euthanasia should be legal, but only if the person is terminally ill. Not any depressed dumbcunt wanting to end his life.

  3. Post #3
    Gold Member
    Yogurt's Avatar
    December 2006
    1,089 Posts
    I believe that it's even more immoral to force someone to live a painful life that will never stop being painful until death, as opposed to letting them die on their own terms in their own way.

  4. Post #4
    Gold Member
    Robber's Avatar
    January 2006
    6,083 Posts
    I'm for euthanasia, but only in very specific cases. It has to be strictly controlled by the government so it can't get abused.

  5. Post #5
    Gold Member
    Hellduck's Avatar
    March 2007
    5,739 Posts
    I agree, but the problem is where to draw the line. I think the slippery slope effect is a little far-fetched though. For those who are interested in this subject, I would recommend watching Terry Pratchett's documentary on the matter.

  6. Post #6
    Wait... so if I write anything here, it's going to show up under my name?
    B!N4RY's Avatar
    December 2009
    7,216 Posts
    Fully support it only if legalized strictly to those that have terminal illness. It's better off to die quick and peacefully than to painfully suffer for long periods of time.

  7. Post #7
    Gold Member
    Raptortheawesome's Avatar
    May 2009
    5,096 Posts
    As long as it's terminal, and the patient agrees, then it should be legal.

  8. Post #8
    Facepunch Babysitter
    BANNED USER's Avatar
    July 2009
    12,305 Posts
    I fully agree with the idea of legalized euthanasia, the issue here is how many people will be killed without their concent. Their needs to be a system in place for making sure you're not making a huge mistake.

  9. Post #9
    Fully support it.I don't wanna to be heavy for my relatives.

  10. Post #10
    If there is pain to a point where it is literally impossible to create joy for one self, and it is permanent/can't be fixed, then I'm going to have to be for this.

  11. Post #11
    Gold Member
    Eltro102's Avatar
    February 2008
    10,876 Posts
    I think that euthanasia should be legalized, as I believe that a person's suffering should not be prolonged is they do not wish for it to be.
    However, the "system" for euthanasia should be sophisticated enough to get a proper consent, and people are only euthanized at proper
    clinics as to prevent the use of euthanasia as a excuse for mercy, honour, or general killing.

    Also, you somehow beat me in making this thread by 9 minutes without me noticing this thread

    Edited:

    On a slightly more controversial note, (as I see it) as the population of Earth is increasing considerably, at one point the population will exceed the maximum sustainable population on Earth (i.e. food, water, infrastructure etc..). When this happens, the quality of life as a general on Earth will decrese considerably
    If at this point we have not found some sort of technological solution (e.g. easy almost limitless energy, fast space travel to settle other planets, or some other solution), forced euthanization will have to be brought in to control the population. Some people might think that this smacks of eugenics, but it will only be a last-choice solution, and only if we havent found said solution.

  12. Post #12
    Gold Member
    TheWhiteFox1's Avatar
    July 2009
    4,167 Posts
    I feel that if someone is in a form of pain that's unbearable, they should be allowed Euthanasia. In my opinion, a person shouldn't be forced to live in terrible pain due to an illness, but, like someone else said, it should be properly administered.

  13. Post #13
    Gold Member
    Eltro102's Avatar
    February 2008
    10,876 Posts
    There is also "suicide tourism" which have legalized euthanasia clinics eg Digitas in Switzerland,

  14. Post #14
    ThisGuy0's Avatar
    July 2009
    2,119 Posts
    Anyone should be allowed access to euthanasia if they so desire. Who are we to tell people that they can't do what they want with their own bodies just because of our personal views on suicide? There would need to be systems in place to make sure people fully understand the gravity of their action before comitting suicide though.

  15. Post #15
    Gold Member
    Viva's Avatar
    July 2006
    13,987 Posts
    Let's get Kevorkian up in here.

    No in all seriousness, i think that someone who is terminally, and i mean absolutely no chance for survival, that their last wishes should be respected even if among them is to ask for a premature end.

  16. Post #16
    Pass along
    commander204's Avatar
    May 2008
    4,065 Posts
    This reminds of an episode in Dr. House. Where one guy was in a vegetative state and was deemed incurable by other doctors, but of course Dr. House heals him etcetera. Now I agree this is just a work of fiction, but I am sure things like this can and probably happen in real life. e.g.: Somebody is deemed unable to give consent to anything and his relatives choose to end his 'painful' live, but a treatment could help him get back to normal.

    Long story short, I would say yes. But only in cases where it can be medicinally proven that there is no way to help them. Which means, that their disease has to be confirmed.

    Of course we could find a treatment in the future, perhaps the very next day somebody gets euthanized, but I suppose that is inevitable with decisions like these.

  17. Post #17
    Gold Member
    iPope's Avatar
    October 2008
    1,774 Posts
    I'd propose the following system for euthanasia if it was legalized :

    1) Three Doctor Signatures
    2) A Judge's Signature (obv. after hearing the case ect.)
    3) Legal contracts reviewed by laywers.
    4) Anything situation where the death of someone would highly benefit another should be considered more carefully.

    and the last point: every decision should be done by a case by case basis. I don't think that euthanasia is something that can have one strict ruling on.

    Some people might think that is pretty excessive. That's the best way I can think of too try and abolish exploitation of what could become legal murder. I don't think it will ever be legal in the UK though, not while there is a way to exploit the system, and there will always be a way.

  18. Post #18
    Gold Member
    Eltro102's Avatar
    February 2008
    10,876 Posts
    This reminds of an episode in Dr. House. Where one guy was in a vegetative state and was deemed incurable by other doctors, but of course Dr. House heals him etcetera. Now I agree this is just a work of fiction, but I am sure things like this can and probably happen in real life. e.g.: Somebody is deemed unable to give consent to anything and his relatives choose to end his 'painful' live, but a treatment could help him get back to normal.

    Long story short, I would say yes. But only in cases where it can be medicinally proven that there is no way to help them. Which means, that their disease has to be confirmed.

    Of course we could find a treatment in the future, perhaps the very next day somebody gets euthanized, but I suppose that is inevitable with decisions like these.
    Cryogenic freezing till a cure is found?
    Almost the same as euthanasia except you have a very very very small chance of coming back to life (when/if it is possible to defrost you and cure you)

  19. Post #19
    Gold Member
    VistaPOWA's Avatar
    October 2008
    8,370 Posts
    Cryogenic freezing till a cure is found?
    Almost the same as euthanasia except you have a very very very small chance of coming back to life (when/if it is possible to defrost you and cure you)
    The problem with that is, there is no cost-effective solution for preserving humans yet. Preserving a head (not a whole body!) can cost more than ten thousand dollars.

  20. Post #20
    Gold Member
    Eltro102's Avatar
    February 2008
    10,876 Posts
    The problem with that is, there is no cost-effective solution for preserving humans yet. Preserving a head (not a whole body!) can cost more than ten thousand dollars.
    Only for the rich then?

    Could you not preserve just the brain of the person?
    And maybe in the future transplant it into another body

  21. Post #21
    Gold Member
    Cone's Avatar
    August 2011
    18,870 Posts
    I'm all for it. Someone wants to die, it should be within their rights to. It's not like we're almost extinct anyways, a few more dead people wouldn't hurt.

  22. Post #22
    Gold Member
    SpaceGhost's Avatar
    December 2010
    4,801 Posts
    If my whole body is paralyzed you better pull the plug, imagine not being able to move for a few decades while you slowly rot away. Fuck that.

  23. Post #23
    OFWGKTA
    jbthekid's Avatar
    July 2011
    9,687 Posts
    I think it would be okay if it was legalized, but like everyone else here has already said, it should be heavily regulated.

  24. Post #24
    HAND.CAT
    barttool's Avatar
    July 2010
    4,592 Posts
    You know, this thread is a one-sided discussion, we all pretty much agree on the same.

  25. Post #25
    Gold Member
    Cone's Avatar
    August 2011
    18,870 Posts
    You know, this thread is a one-sided discussion, we all pretty much agree on the same.
    That's because everybody here knows it would suck to be on life support.

  26. Post #26
    NATURALLY WIRED TO HAVE SEX WITH KIDS
    Rubs10's Avatar
    June 2007
    8,733 Posts
    I agree with OP, Euthanasia should be legal, but only if the person is terminally ill. Not any depressed dumbcunt wanting to end his life.
    Why? If they want it to end their suffering, why can't they have it? It doesn't effect anybody but themselves.

    And if you say that they should stay alive for their family, if my family doesn't want me to smoke pot, does that mean it's bad when I do? I don't believe it's immoral if you choose not to suffer for someone else's happiness.

  27. Post #27
    Gold Member
    carcarcargo's Avatar
    October 2007
    15,042 Posts
    This could be a two edged sword, on one hand it allows those who are truly suffering to die in a dignified way, on the other hand if regulations are too lax you could end up with situations were families pressure and guilt trip family members who may not want to die but feel they have to due to pressure.

    I also feel that no one should have the right to pull the plug on a patient who cannot consent.

  28. Post #28
    Gold Member
    Chompster's Avatar
    September 2006
    410 Posts
    I noticed that a lot of people are saying that they want it available only to terminally ill patients. Do you think that if all people have the right to live, all people (not just the ill) should have the right to die? I'm not saying I agree with that, but it's just a thought.

  29. Post #29
    Gold Member
    carcarcargo's Avatar
    October 2007
    15,042 Posts
    I noticed that a lot of people are saying that they want it available only to terminally ill patients. Do you think that if all people have the right to live, all people (not just the ill) should have the right to die? I'm not saying I agree with that, but it's just a thought.
    I'm pretty sure you're allowed to die, but if you're not terminally ill the government should not help you do it.

  30. Post #30
    Gold Member
    Chompster's Avatar
    September 2006
    410 Posts
    I'm pretty sure you're allowed to die, but if you're not terminally ill the government should not help you do it.
    You aren't allowed to die. Suicide is illegal.

    Edit: Not everywhere, but still.

  31. Post #31
    ECrownofFire's Avatar
    January 2011
    2,004 Posts
    I say if somebody wants to kill themselves, let them, but have them talk to their family and friends first.

    But no non-voluntary or involuntary.

  32. Post #32
    Project Lead, Internet Explorer for Linux
    lavacano's Avatar
    October 2008
    14,495 Posts
    ...I want to argue anti-euthanasia just to keep the thread interesting but I can't think of anything that would support an anti-euthanasia viewpoint :saddowns:

    The only thing I have that would be anti would be "I'd like to fight the disease to the very end" but that's only me, and just because that's how I roll should not be the reason we make the law go that way.

  33. Post #33
    Gold Member
    carcarcargo's Avatar
    October 2007
    15,042 Posts
    You aren't allowed to die. Suicide is illegal.

    Edit: Not everywhere, but still.
    I don't really see the point in illegal suicide, although if someone fails suicide I hink they should be sent to therapy.

    Edited:

    ...I want to argue anti-euthanasia just to keep the thread interesting but I can't think of anything that would support an anti-euthanasia viewpoint :saddowns:

    The only thing I have that would be anti would be "I'd like to fight the disease to the very end" but that's only me, and just because that's how I roll should not be the reason we make the law go that way.
    The fact that people who don't want to die could be pressured into being euthanasied is a pretty good one if you ask me

  34. Post #34
    Gold Member
    Hellborg 65's Avatar
    March 2006
    3,256 Posts
    You aren't allowed to die. Suicide is illegal.

    Edit: Not everywhere, but still.
    I'm pretty sure up until a certain point, if you committed suicide, your family had to pay a fine.

  35. Post #35
    Proudly supporting the JIDF
    Dennab
    July 2010
    22,111 Posts
    I remember Britain reserved the death penalty for people who tried to commit suicide.

  36. Post #36
    BrQ
    Test victim #2
    BrQ's Avatar
    June 2008
    6,861 Posts
    Why? If they want it to end their suffering, why can't they have it? It doesn't effect anybody but themselves.

    And if you say that they should stay alive for their family, if my family doesn't want me to smoke pot, does that mean it's bad when I do? I don't believe it's immoral if you choose not to suffer for someone else's happiness.
    Not just family, literally everyone around him would be affected in a very negative way.

  37. Post #37
    Gold Member
    DaCommie1's Avatar
    June 2008
    7,017 Posts
    It should be up to the patient with the disease, them only, and only at a point where they are physically unable to do almost anything anymore.

  38. Post #38
    Gold Member
    carcarcargo's Avatar
    October 2007
    15,042 Posts
    It should be up to the patient with the disease, them only, and only at a point where they are physically unable to do almost anything anymore.
    I would disagree with the last bit, if someone is in severe pain from terminal cancer then I see no reason why someone shouldn't be allowed to be euthanised

  39. Post #39
    Gold Member
    .FLAP.JACK.DAN.'s Avatar
    September 2010
    4,125 Posts
    Not just family, literally everyone around him would be affected in a very negative way.
    Reminds me when I kid at my school got killed by a truck. Nearly every student including me was very sadden from this and I only known the kid for a week.

  40. Post #40
    King of the Oil Refinery
    Tobba's Avatar
    December 2008
    6,212 Posts
    I would strongly agree, it should be up to the patient though

    If they are in coma, they hopefully can not feel any pain, plus, its better to atleast cover one scenario, you cant always cover all of them