This paper argues that euthanasia is a humane practice that essentially restores man's right to die. The paper explains the two different types of euthanasia: active and positive or passive and negative. It discusses why the law views the types differently and looks at ethical and moral arguments on both sides of the issue. The paper concludes with arguments that support euthanasia and contends that the bases of these arguments are religious, moral, and ethical.
From the Paper:
"Advances in modern medical technology have served to deny people the right to die, and euthanasia, it may be argued, has emerged with the purpose of reclaiming that right. Euthanasia, which is defined as "granting painless death to a hopelessly ill patient with a non-curable disease," is a very controversial issue (Russell 3). Illegal in all countries, except the Nertherlands, it is still practiced all over the world in an attempt to give people the right to a painless, and natural, death (Emanuel 1). In short, the advances in modern medicine and its techniques, have created a situation whereby people's lives are artificially extended, despite the fact that they could be in an irrecoverable coma or suffering from an incurable chronic illness, leading increasing numbers of people to support euthanasia, as an option for a humane and dignified death."