Euthanasia should be legalized with requirements

1. ImmoralYes, it is a personal belief, but I also have a personal belief that triangles have three sides. Just because it is a personal belief does not make untrue.When you said the "world is not so black and white that Kant's moral belief system should be absolute for everyone." You didn't give a reason for this that the world isn't black & white. Further, you state that "In the case of the terminally ill pain is useless because there is nothing one can do to save their life. Therefore Kant's moral belief system becomes irrelevant.", but Kant's reasoning didn't depend on whether or not there was a possibility of survival. Also, there is nothing that is impossible just highly improbable, so there is not a single person that is without hope."If animals are allowed that humanity then why not us?"We separate ourselves from animals in many ways. We have a Universal Declaration of Human rights but not animal rights. Humans are separate from animals because we are capable of higher thinking, and realizing that we exist. Further, you assume I am in favor of euthanizing animals.2. Subjectivity It doesn't matter what the source of the pain is, it still makes you act differently, and you don't dispute that. Further, you say that since illness is natural is valid, but pain from torture is invalid since it is not natural. That is the appeal to nature logical fallacy. [5]3. Right to DieThey also had her parents' words which were the other party in the case. Non-voluntary euthanasia is the proper term. [1]Also, you have never shown there was a right, and the supreme court unanimously agreed there was no right. [2]4. Slippery Slope It isn't an opinion, it is a trend shown by the countries that have legal euthanasia, and in fact just recently Belgium, one of 4 countries that have euthanasia, now allows euthanasia of children. [3] "...to suggest that infants would start being euthanized without probable cause is highly unlikely..." Probable cause? You are saying if there is a probable cause then we can euthanize infants, and you still say that the slippery slope is my opinion? Also, the Netherlands thinks they have probable cause too.5. Voluntary Yes, the Nazi plan wasn't voluntary, I wasn't saying it was. I agree that it targeted the ill and disabled, and what demographic does this "voluntary" euthanasia target? It is the same group of people. According to the New England Journal of Medicine, Euthanasia suffers from a high amount of complications from failure to induce coma, a longer time than expected for death, etc. [4] Also, a BBC report 1 in 5 cases of euthanasia are not "easy". [5]"There is no Nazi party here trying to find legal methods of exterminating people." This wasn't the point I was making. In fact you avoided everything in this point. Everything in this argument was to show that it isn't voluntary as you think, that there is coercion, and guilt that factor into such "choices".6. Pain Relief You NEVER addressed this point.7. Terri SchiavoIt wasn't euthanasia in the way you used it, but it was Non-Voluntary euthanasia. " She had made the choice to die..." That is not true. As stated in the last round "There are no written declarations by Terri Schiavo as to her intention with regard to the issue". There was no choice made by her. If there was a choice, there would not have been a court case.8. Gallup PollEuthanasia isn't a unique situation, I showed many other things that would go into the same category of only involving the persons opting for it. "By your phrasing the people over 60 would have no say in the matter." I am not sure how you came to that conclusion, I am sure they were part of the people opposed. The point was that public opinion has no validity on what should and should not be law.If you are in favor of euthanasia, gay marriage, and marijuana for the reason that it only affects those involved, then you should be in favor of the other things I named such as public nudity, beastiality, or polygamy for the same reason. " It's not forcing anything on the nation as a whole." Yes, it does that was the subject of points 4 & 5. The majority don't decide laws here. See video. http://www.youtube.com...The government protects people from themselves all the time with seat belt and helmet laws."euthanasia is the choice of an individual." Like I said you didn't argue point 5 about if it is or not. I made the case, and gave evidence for that it isn't, you made a statement that it is.9. Logical FallaciesI didn't use appeal to authority because I never said that something like "Well [unqualified person] doesn't think that euthanasia should be illegal too."About the Slippery Slope, I never said that euthanasia is genocide. I said that euthanasia lead down the same path as mass murder. I showed how the two are similar and how slowly countries are moving in that direction. It would have been a logical fallacy if I didn't provide proof. It seems you dropped you case that this is the appeal to nature. Refusing a medical treatment is not ignoring pain since they can still get different medical treatment that is aimed at relieving pain. If someone jumps off a skyscraper, that is suicide because it is ending their life sooner than it naturally would have, but refusing medical treatment is not suicide because it is not ending their life sooner than it naturally would have. P.S. I would do a debate on Gay Marriage or Marijuana since I oppose both.Sources[1] http://euthanasia.procon.org...[2] http://www.oyez.org...[3] http://www.bbc.co.uk...[4] http://www.nejm.org...[5] http://news.bbc.co.uk...[6] https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com...