This house endorses euthanasia

Nice views, Con. The greatest will in the world is not the will to die. Rather, it is the will to live. Doctors, or surgeons, as you see, get an undertaking signed from the relatives of the patient, stating that they will perform the surgery to the best of their abilities, but if they fail, they are not held responsible. Almost all doctors (excluding the unscrupulous ones) are very well aware of the value of life and have their sole aim as to work to safeguard it. Sometimes, it is better to alleviate suffering than to see a patient writhe in pain. Most people (myself included) cannot bear to see others in pain. Even if the person in question is my deadliest foe, I will sympathize with him if he suffers. 1)I agree that euthanasia is a rather tempting solution for all the problems you"ve mentioned. But, we must accept that past a certain age and level of mental abilities, it is highly difficult and causes a great deal of stress to the people who care for the patients. I see my own parents suffer enormous strain to take care of my grandparents. How long will it be before the caretakers break down? Even the strongest heart has its limits. If this continues, we are only looking at a population with a decreasing mental fitness and well-being. With the amount of age-related and chronic diseases rising, we"re looking at stagnation, not progress. We need to move forward and concentrate on other activities. We need to look at how to nurture the future, not how to put a bandage on the present. 2)By your own definition, we can never have an individual with a fixed opinion. People are fickle. Their tastes and interests vary over time. With your logic, suicides must be a punishable offense, as if the victims had survived, they might have lived a better life. There is no "what if" in life. You cannot go back and change things. You"ve got to accept things as they come. Maybe if a patient chooses to die, and he does, he dies on a high note, knowing that he chose his destiny. If he doesn"t, he needs to pull out of his past and live his life. All sorts of factors are out there that cause stress to people. For example, I see smoke coming out of a factory and go, "That is causing an increase of carbon dioxide and I"m going to suffer because of it." You choose what affects you and what not. Some of the happiest people in the world are surrounded by problems we cannot even think of. But yet they are happy because they choose to not give in. (The Dark Knight trilogy is a good example) 3)I"m assuming you"ve seen the film "I, Robot". V.I.K.I makes an argument about how its definition of the three laws has evolved over time. I"m not saying that we should kill people, just that people should stop fighting against events and just go with the flow. Stop trying to assert control. All the fight and struggle you see in hospitals is because of people afraid of death. A thorough understanding of life and death will help all patients. Patients holding onto a life that is fading is like carrying water around in a basket with holes. It is just not going to be of use. 4)There is no question of God here. I"m a theist and an atheist. The foundation of Hindutva (I"m strong only with my religion, I cannot talk about others), is based on people accepting what is present. We all are gods, and we are the creators of life. If we create life, we must nurture it, and when the time comes, let go of it. I"m sure that other religions are based on similar principles, just worded differently. Yes, we do have the right to take life away, if we have the power to give it. The question really is, "Are we justified in taking this life away ?" If we decide to remove lives, then we must make sure we"re justified in our view. And we must never turn back after we"ve made our decision. Indecisiveness about things (including the will to live) has been the biggest hindrance to life since its inception. I think I"ve made a good argument. Over to you, Con.