Euthanasia

6Norman Geisler and Frank Turek once said, “If avoiding suffering is really a valid justification for ending someone’s life, then we should command every act of murder as an act of mercy” (Geisler and Turek, 188). Seneca once said, “Just as I shall select my ship when I am about to go on a voyage, or my house when I propose to take a residence, so I shall choose my death when I am about to depart from life”(Seneca, 63). These two quotes offer a brief interpretation and representation of the contrasting sides of euthanasia. Euthanasia is defined as “The act of deliberately ending a person’s life to relieve suffering.” It was in the 19th century that the word was used in the sense of speeding up the process of dying and destruction of so called useless lives. Today, it is defined as “The deliberate ending of life of a person suffering from an incurable disease.” ("Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide...” 1)

On that account, the argument in favor of euthanasia brings into investigation why a person should be forced to live without being able to breathe, eat, or think for themselves. This argument believes someone should not be forced to live with constant suffering and pain when he or she feels like their life is meaningless and destroyed ("Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide...” 1). The ethical argument that supports euthanasia states that everyone should be able to choose when and how they want to die, and they should be able to do so without being judged ("Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide...” 1). The pragmatic argument explains that it is best to regulate euthanasia correctly [passive euthanasia] because it is becoming a widespread practice ("Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide...” 1).

On the other hand, arguments against euthanasia include that euthanasia is murder. This side of the dispute argues that the desire to die ultimately derives from depression: a disease that can be cured. Though those that are against this act agree with the concept of freedom, they believe...