In the United States, voluntary euthanasia should be legal for anyone who wants it.

"No, no, no, I already gave the definition in my opening statement as to what we are debating upon." 1. Well, I didn't expect it to be opened to anyone and everyone, but if so, let's go on. I'd like to apologize for that. My bad :P "What is the danger in this, I mean the number of people who will decide, they are just going to euthanize themselves because it happens to be legal will probably amount to... 0." 1. Ok, I'll now explain how legalizing it will kinda promote it. I will now explain what legalization does. 1. It removes all criminal penalties which prevents people to do the act, in this case, euthanasia. 2. It enables people to advertise their service in aiding a person who wants euthanasia. In fact, with this definition, it's technically allowing someone to commit suicide legally. If you read my example, I explained how legalization increased the acts (By showing examples of legalization of alcohol, and marijuana.) You see, since euthanasia isn't being offered now, people are actually holding on. Imagine it this way. I'll use myself and a friend of mine as an example. In my case, I come from a decent household, and my friend, who we shall call "John", comes from a rich household. I'm forced to study hard, as my family wouldn't be able to support my further studies. Therefore, I put in tons of effort in my studies. However, in John's case, he doesn't have to push on. His family has the cash to support him in his studies. What's the use of putting lots of effort? He has the easy way out anyways. You see, if the easy way out is offered, what's the use of holding on? Many people would give up. "Why was I born this way", or "Why God why" victims have the easy way out. No longer have they to go on. "When some one takes something like alcohol, it is often on impulse, which under my definition would not make sense, or pressure" 1. With this definition, wouldn't someone choose euthanasia on impulse too? Like, after a breakup, a horrible day, etc. Note that the argument you stated was allowing this choice to be open to anyone, as long as they give their consent, and the doctor gives his. So, literally anyone should be allowed to choose euthanasia, right? This isn't a good thing at all. Would that mean kids are allowed to go for euthanasia? What about the mentally disabled? Giving this right to everyone is something despicable. Children make the worst mistake. They feel emotional; many would easily give up. I believe even if we were to legalize the use of euthanasia, we shouldn't let it be available to just everyone. If you're thinking doctors will be the check and balance to this dilemma, you're wrong. I have two arguments for this, and here goes: a. If you think doctors will all have an ironguard moral shield, you're wrong. It's easy to imagine that if euthanasia is legalized for anyone, there'll be centers JUST for euthanasia. Doctors will specialize in this field, as there are many doctors out there that long for money, and are willing to take a life away, ANY life away. After all, it was their choice right? b. Hippocratic Oath. "However, the moment they're legalized, Bam! Instantly, the amount of people addicted to those substances increased tremendously. A. Getting addicted to euthanasia... doesn't really make sense." 1. Well, the thing is you took my words out if context. Any average joe that reads this would assume I said people would get addicted euthanasia, making me seem like a retard. But it's taken out of context. If combined with my previous statement, I'm trying to show how legalization would increase usage. "A. Understandable, yes. Selfish... yes, to me at least. You could make a good case for that." Thanks :) "I didn't know it was the case that people in a close knit family get so much joy from watching each other die painful and inevitably soon deaths." 1. Well, I don't know about you, but to me, if I know my grandmother's dying, I would visit her everyday. I would be happy and cherish every last moment I have with her, instead of crying every single time I visit her. She's already sad enough; the least I could do is to make her last days happy, right? "You don't take euthanasia, you are euthanized by a willing doctor, it isn't an over the counter med or something." 1. I didn't say anything about it being a fast food chain lol. I said "choice", and then "take it". Hence, meaning I took the choice, and opted for euthanasia. " If this family is so close, I would think they would have enjoyed their life, and it would not have taken them until their death to realize they had a good run." 1. I never said they didn't enjoyed their life. If your loved ones are dying, you'd naturally spend even more time and effort on them, even when you've had an amazing life with them. "In this example, I think the mother is somewhat justified in deciding not to take all the money her son has away just so she could delay a painful death." 1. Yea, it's a justified action, but I'm trying to show the cons of it, as explained further on. "So we could determine just how much this costs, can you specify what kind of treatment she is getting, if she has medical benefits, if so are they good, where this is taking place, and their son's net worth." 1. Well, life support? Lol, it's just an example. I didn't create a background check for this. The fact is, I'm trying to show that people's life matter more than money. I'd give the world to have my mom enjoy another day in this world. "Overall through your example, if this mother is on her death bed, and her son shoves the grandchildren she is leaving in her face everyday, then I think if this example ran 100 times most of the time the pressure would actually be to push her to live as long as possible, not die." 1. The thing pressuring her is the love of a mother. She feels that she's taking her son's time and money away. True, you're feeling goddamn happy, but please remember that you're being happy at the expense of your son. wouldn't you feel guilty and selfish? "He really is repaying her well by... what? How exactly is he trying to repay her, think about how him throwing away all his finances just so his mother could go through pain everyday? I mean I really don't know." 1. He's repaying her by taking care of her, the way she took care of him. By letting her spend her last days happily, with her family. "This is a pretty lofty clam, do you have any evidence? It isn't really a common sense claim, definitely not." 1. Well, naturally, if you're old, and you can barely move, you'd easily assume you're being a burden, right? Wait, no. You KNOW you are a burden, eat, sleep, repeat. Leeching off your family's income. Most old people do not know how much their presence have helped, at all. I would know. My grandfather always thought he was a burden, but in fact, no. I felt happy to take care of him. Every day, our usual chat would bring warmth into my heart. "I feel like in the end that would actually help their family. Financially, and maybe emotionally. Watching your mother or father or whoever die a painful suffering death can't be fun." 1. When I referred to older people, I never said they're suffering. Imagine this. You've taken the most important and active role ever. Raising your child, working, etc. And now, you're literally doing nothing except leeching off your children. You may not know how it feels, unless you really give it some thought. "I think it is only rational that by law we allow some one who is suffering from a depression they can't get over or a disease they have no chance of getting over, and there is a doctor willing to euthanize them, it is not the government's place to dictate whether or not they can die what is to them a way to get a dignified and peaceful death." Well, you said ANYONE, not limiting it to terminal patients. It may be tough to argue regarding terminal patients, but allowing anyone? Oh, come on. A kid fails his test and is afraid to come home? Opt for euthanasia. Maybe if euthanasia is available to anyone, "running away from home" will be changed to "Running back to our heavenly home" or such. Since the argument is whether we should let anyone have the right to do so, my points would differ from my previous' (I thought it was limited to those suffering from pain only, lol). If you truly believe it should be up to kids to choose their life and death, then what's the use of parent's consent? Mentally disabled children will be allowed to do it because they are "special", and they hate the way they're born. Unless the earth gets super populated to the point it cause mass hysteria, such an act should be frowned upon. "If there are people who are suffering from a depression they can not overcome, or an illness that is hopeless and painful, but they don't want to put a bullet in their head, why should the government stop them from allowing for them to die from what is to them a peaceful and dignified death." 1. "Can not overcome" We can try our best to prevent such act. Imagine a world where there's always an easy way out. Oh, I have AIDS? It's ok, I can go for euthanasia. Oh, I can't find a job. I'd rather die than live! Ew, working in Walmart suck. I don't want my friend to see me this way. We should not simply allow the right to death to anyone. We need an authority to control this power, if such powers are ever given. 2. Dignified death? Are you sure it's dignified? You committed suicide! Last I checked, the definition of dignified is, "having or showing a composed or serious manner that is worthy of respect" and last I check, respect means having admiration for. You want people to respect suicide?