Euthanasia

I see nothing wrong with choosing to refuse treatment and die naturally, If that's the definition of passive Euthanasia then I am for passive Euthanasia. There is nothing immoral about dying naturally. I am only against active Euthanasia where someone chooses to intentionally end their life by either killing themselves or having someone kill them... BEFORE they would have otherwise died naturally... I don't understand how you can say Euthanasia is not killing someone.. that makes no sense to me?... It definitely is. euthanasia [yoo-thuh-ney-zhuh, -zhee-uh, -zee-uh] Spell Syllables Examples Word Origin See more synonyms on Thesaurus.com noun 1. Also called mercy killing. the act of putting to death painlessly or allowing to die, as by withholding extreme medical measures, a person or animal suffering from an incurable, especially a painful, disease or condition. Dictionary.com^ Euthanasia is suicide... (Someone Consciously choosing to end their life) So the study I provided before is valid and applies to this debate.... Euthanasia is actually quite often referred to as "Assisted Suicide" YOU SAY THAT THE PATIENT MUST BE IN THE RIGHT OF MIND, BUT THAT IS FALSE, AND AS I SAID MOST ARE NOT AND THE PUSH FOR MENTALLY ILL PATIENTS BEING ALLOWED TO KILL THEMSELVES IS BECOMING MORE AND MORE PROMINENT, PLEASE READ THE FOLLOWING EXAMPLES...(please not I am not yelling, i just want this to stand out) http://www.mercatornet.com... http://www.nationalreview.com... And as far as the 93% being unhappy, That applies to the fact that the majority of these people who commit (Euthanasia/Suicide)... (same thing)...are suffering from depression. That's the main mental illness. My apologies for using 93%... I'm not sure of the exact percentage of the total 93%, but the number is high and I know it's the majority (that's suffering from depression). Even if they don't have A family... which is A very sad situation.. doesn't mean that they should kill themselves. We are supposed to be brothers and sisters towards each other, which is why I propose more people need to be there for these elderly people with no families, so that they don't have to die alone. Not only would the end of their days be more joyous but through the suffering they are experiencing love and compassion could be drawn out from the people around them, whether direct family or not. And although yes, you can refuse this treatment, the question itself can be very demeaning. Especially when your insurance company deicides that your life isn't worth the 4,000$/month CHEMO but then offers to pay the 50$ to administer lethal drugs. By killing these people we are not loving them. It is never A loving act to kill someone, even if they're in pain and have lost the will to live. It IS ALWAYS more loving to try and get them to see the value in life, their life in particular and how great A gift it truly is and how great A gift suffering is and how it prepares us for the afterlife. Dying however so that someone else may live is indeed very honorable as long as the intention is not to die themselves but rather completely focused on the fact that the other(s) may live.. case in point... jumping on a grenade to save ones platoon. It all comes down to the intention of the individual, which I argue cannot be to directly end their own life. Finally I would like to point out that if you don't believe that there is A life after this life, then all my points are invalid and mean nothing to you. Everything I say is based off the fact that there is an Afterlife and that we as human beings are not merely flesh but a body soul unity which separates once we die.