Euthanasia

That doesn't change the fact that its still completely implausible since they could never get away with it as you were insinuating though. The scenario is still completely idiotic and you are still a massive idiot. " where is the proof? Let's read on. "They still cant perform the actual euthanasia themselves though, legalized euthanasia requires a medical professional to do that, so your dumb scenario still is not in any way based in reality. " People would push for private euthanasia because of privacy. It would be possible for that to happen. But again, that would only render scenario 1 useless. You just gave me an idea for another scenario! Also, have you ever thought that private Euthanasia would be possible if there was a signature? The debate is do you agree with Euthanasia in humans. You obviously do not agree with all types of Euthanasia. Therefore, I think you forfeit. Scenario 4: Frank is terminally ill, and qualifies for Euthanasia. However, frank still has a shot at recovery, and does not want to go through with it. However, his money hungry daughter knows he there is still a chance, and wants to make sure she gets her part of the will before he removes it. While he is asleep, she forges his signature for the Euthanasia form, and puts special guidelines. She states that he should be put to sleep at her house, with a doctor's supervision. When frank is asleep, the doctor comes, and they perform Euthanasia. This is very sad and possible if Euthanasia would be legalized. " No stupid, being diagnosed with something doesn't put euthanasia on the table, you have to be suffering from it for years and years, suffer an immense amount of pain, and be on the verge of death for euthanasia to become an option. Were you dropped on your head as a child a lot or did you just naturally turn out to be a complete idiot on your own? " This I found very insulting. You can suffer immense pain and be near death, but still have a shot at living. Also, you are the one making guidelines for this. The government might have guidelines very different. I will also argue that it may advance so much, that Euthanasia will be allowed for people who aren't even terminally ill. " Your scenario is still something that only a brain-dead aborted fetus could have come up with and thought would be a common occurrence under euthanasia laws. " No this is just pure insult. I don't have to refute this! "Being just diagnosed with HIV doesn't count as on the verge of death idiot" Again, I changed it to advanced cervical cancer. Read man read! "For the love of all things holy, not having long to live is only one of the qualifications that need to be met for euthanasia to become an option, as I have already mentioned that you once again failed to comprehend. " You basically give me my point on a sliver plater. She would qualify for Euthanasia. Thank you. "Being diagnosed with cervical cancer does not = on the verge of death. " Refer to my other rebuttal for that. Again, I state, ADVANCED CERVICAL CANCER! Here are some of my arguments you dropped You failed to refute my claim that, in scenario 3, Yolanda had advanced cancer. You did not try to refute this. You failed to refute there was avoidable pain. Why perform Euthanasia if the pain is avoidable? You have not successfully refuted that Euthanasia could cause murders and let the people get away with it. You failed to refute that private Euthanasia could be legal with a signature. You also stated you are not for all circumstances of human Euthanasia. Does that mean you forfeit since, when you argue for Euthanasia, you have to argue for all human types of Euthanasia? Thank you ladies and gentleman for reading!