THBT: Voluntary Euthanasia shall be legalized.

Thanks a lot for quoting me and I really appreciated that. I have carefully read your first argument and i know that you are talking only about voluntary euthanasia and that is good. My example of a person depending on mach ines does not fall under non voluntary and i am gonna show you why... lets have a clear definition of voluntary euthanasia.. as i understood it is someone under extreme pain and illness and he or she decides to die.. he or she chooses to die and not to live.. so it is all about the right to choose right? If that is the case, you might have someone who is depending on drugs or machines and the person just decides to die and not to live.. how will that decision be justified and that has been my question and hope you understand now. I believe that person is not in the right position to make such decision.. when people are ill, they might even think there is no way and they are going to die but at the end they survivre. we have seen many cases like that. I have read about voluntary euthanasia and have enough information about it. The only reason you want to legalize this is because people are ill and feel so much pain but you have never shown that there is no way to help out in the future. Voluntary euthanasia will not solve anything at the end of the day because even if you look at today's world, there are many people who dont wanna live and who prefers to die.. so if these people choose to die, are you going to accept that??? You might describe mercy killing as nice as that but the fact is somebody dies here and that is it.As i mentioned, we have seen cases in which the pain on the patient is too much but that patient survivres at the end.. if that is possible then your voluntary euthanasia will then be a big mistake. Another problem with your case is that you didnt even mention what type of voluntary euthanasia you are referring to. If you take active voluntary euthanasia, we find that one to be more painful for instance. Legalizing voluntary euthanasia will lead to something else in the future. for instance, thirty years ago, people supported the right to abort a babe in order to save the mum's life.. and today we have people taking that to a matter of choice.. that a woman should choose to have a babe or not. these are the same problems which are going to occur. hey big contradiction again.. you said this "Since this is voluntary euthanasia, I think that since the patient gave the permission already, we should not worry that the patient might oppose to this. Also, it is not just the patient's permission but euthanasia also needs the permission of the doctor." so you mean the doctor must agree and how about if the patient wants to die but the doctor says no... will that be voluntary or what?? if the doctor must decide at the end, i dont think this is voluntary. About religion, for your information it is a crime to have religious points but we can have an agreement saying this has nothing to do with religion and yeah we will all understand. If you wanna legalize this for instance in a complete religious country, of course people will talk about religion. Look Gay marriage in America, what was the debate based on?? I am not in anyway basing this on religion and forget about that because I wanna have a fair and good debate. Religion forget about it. Of course legalizing something is making it sound right and that is just advertising. And another problem with your case when you mentioned about option for the patient and family members... do you have to include family members in voluntary euthanasia??? of course not. In most cases, of course family members will go against and what are you going to do??? How many people will be brave enough to tell to the doctor, yeah i want my father, my fiance, my wife and so on to die because there is no way to help out. Again you said not even the patient's relatives can oppose this.. so what options are you giving them at the end? It is not just whenever a patient has pain, we should go for that. that will not solve anything and yeah the doctors are being lazy and this is a way for them to make money and the laws cant do anything against them because it is being legalize. The doctors will just be making money by killing people. Lets say i am not happy and i go to a doctor to perform voluntary and sign the form and everything and give him a dollar for instance... he can perfom that on me and nothing can be done against him or her. Your point about a person dying under a doctor hand,is that a failure.. A godo doctor will feel the pain and tell to the family members I am sorry i could not save his life. I did everything I could. That person dies in a natural way.. but under your case the doctor himself is performing the killing and that goes against his job. let me give an example, an elderly person in a nursing home, who can barely understand a breakfast menu, is asked to sign a form consenting to be killed. Is this voluntary or involuntary? Will they be protected by the law? How? Right now the overall prohibition on killing stands in the way. Once one signature can sign away a person's life, what can be as strong a protection as the current absolute prohibition on direct killing? Answer: nothing. Euthanasia is a rejection of value of human life because under no one's life is being saved - life is only taken. we have pain killer to reduce the pain and suffering of the patient and at the same we have doctors continuing to make research for new cures or medicines. That is what we should be doing and not just legalize voluntary euthanasia. This will lead to more problems.. like a patient wants his life to be ended but the doctors do not think so.. what do you think will happen or the doctors feel the patient should die because he has no way to survivre but the patient does not feel that way.. think about that.. I think it is quite a lot.. sorry for that. Thank you for your time. Good day