euthanasia, the good, the bad, and the ugly

after reading many sites to do with euthanasia, for and against, i would have to say, i am for it. BUT however, there are many things wrong with arguments from both sides of the debate.

first, to define euthanasia. most people see it as what it is: assisted suicide. that is, essentially, what it is. it is done for the benefit of the patient, the family and (as sad as it may seem) the health care system. it is done because the patient is in excruciating pain and wish's to die, but does not have the means to do it themselves.

but as i said before, several of the arguments for and against just befuddle me. 

people who are against euthanasia do have some good reasons for their arguments, but one of them that does not make ANY sense to me is the value of life. how valuable is life if you are in constant pain?? it should not be about quantity of life, but quality. it should not be for any religious reasons. the god i know and love would accept this. 

to not let someone have their own choice over life and death and to have their choices dictated to them by political and religious leaders is against everything we are taught to believe in, in our "democratic" society. you see the people and the state they are in. they are depressed because some can barely feed themselves, some cant move without the slightest bit of pain, some cant clean themselves without help. if someone kept their pets in this condition, then the RSPCA would charge them for assault. 

the people against euthanasia for pain related reasons sometimes just say "take more painkillers". fairly blatant. what about people who are paralyzed? you cant take any damn medication for that can you?

but some of the arguments for euthanasia also do not make entire sense to me. they have used the words "terminal illness" as an example for euthanasia. but people with terminal diseases/poisonings/injuries can live for quite a while. no one can predict what time they may die. they have had to use many other names for it, all of which can be interpreted in many different ways. they have to define their ideas and names with more accuracy. 

but when weighing up the arguments, believe me, it is easy to see it is almost best (but not the easiest decision to make) to opt for euthanasia for a loved one. personally.... i would HATE to make the decision, but i respect anyone who does have to make the decision and opts for euthanasia. 

so to all political leaders, religious leaders and "ethicists", stop dictating peoples choices to them. everyone should have a right to say yes or no, based on THEIR OWN BELIEVES AND MORALS.

so.... what do you expect to read here?

well, from the title of my blog, it is easy to guess the general idea of why i am writing my thought and opinions, to be discussed with others. i want to ensure that people think about the things they see on T.V, not just mindlessly agree with it. people should always get a second opinion, if it be from a less biased news source or someone who is an expert on the matter. the problem is, people value convenience too much. 

so i challenge people to think and feel their OWN ideas about what happens in this world, from euthanasia to the invasion of Iraq. from religious differences to global warming. the things that make humanity what it is.

i'm not sure if anyone reads this, and as long as one person does, and thinks about their already cemented ideas about a certain thing, and realizes that there are other ways to think about things, then my goal has been reached. i just hope to purvey these ideas to a broader audience then just one person though.

you don't need a crowd to change the world. you need one person who can lead them