Life and Death are the Same Coin
There are always two sides to a coin. There is a heads and a tails. Much like a coin a controversial idea or argument has two sides. While that may be an oversimplification of the varying opinions that people have, the focus will be primarily on the two sides rather than the whole spectrum. On one side we have the supporters (pro) and on the other side we have the opponents (con). Both sides generally consist of a diverse pool of people so for simplicity purposes I will just refer to them as supporters and opponents.
The supporters of euthanasia are the ones that want to legalize euthanasia and make it more available in places like the United States. One of the major augments that supporters use is that keeping a terminally ill patients alive against their will is immoral since they already know they will die soon. This is especially the case when it also causes suffering to both the patient and their loved ones. Making someone suffer excruciating pain for the sake of prolonging their life just for them to live a little longer is selfish and immoral. Another major argument that supporters also use is that terminally ill patients should be able to choose how they want to go out of this world. What the supporters call it is “Death with Dignity” and what it boils down to is not wanting to degraded as a human being. When terminally ill patients are taken into the hospital they are at the mercy to those around them. Rather than having to ask for a nurse or physician for food or access to the bathroom, terminally ill patients want to be in control of their lives even with the small remainder they have left. Rather than going out as the someone who was babied and died a slow death on a hospital bed. It would be a lot more dignified going out as the person they were before succumbing to their disease and being able to choose how and when they died. This goes into another argument that supporters use. Supporters argue that death is not immoral and having the ability to choose whether you want to die is a human right. Supporters believe that just as much as a person should be able to live how they want they should also be able to die how they want. There is nothing wrong with dying as those that choose to participate in euthanasia are of no consequence to others. Other than their loved ones and the physicians involved no one is really affected in anyway. The vast majority of the world would be unaffected by a terminally ill patient being euthanized so why do opponents get a say in how they die?
While these arguments use a lot of moral reasoning, I still found these reasons to be very persuasive. What I found to be the most persuasive was the right to death as a human being. Even though the first two reasons used a lot of empathy I still found the last one to be the most convincing. When you think about it death is part of human life. Whether you believe in the afterlife or not death is inherently part of the cycle that is human life. Life and death are all part of the same coin so how come a human can freely choose how to live, but when they want to die someone gets a say?