Euthanasia be legalized.

  Euthanasia refers to ending a life for relieving pain and suffering. It also means a good death in Greek. People usually describe a circumstance like this: A person has some horrible, deadly disease. He is trapped in a hospital bed, with all kinds of medical equipment around him, unable to move or do anything except exist. He is in tremendous pain. He begs to have these machines disconnected, so he can go out and live out whatever life he has left and leave in peace. But the doctors say no, because to turn off the machines would definitively result in his death, and they have an ideological bias against doing this. Doesn't the patient have rights to make that decision for himself? (Johansen, 2000). Luke Gormally said that “The claimed justification for euthanasia first takes the moral high ground of compassion. When a truer form of compassion is found in palliative care, the ground shifts to an appeal to human rights, especially to the sovereignty of self- determination.” Euthanasia should be legalized because of human right, unbearable pain, patient’s wills.

People have the right to make decision by themselves. Everyone has the right to decide how they should die. “In…cases where there are no dependants who might exert pressure one way or the other, the right of the individual to choose should be paramount. So long as the patient is lucid, and his or her intent is clear beyond doubt, there need be no further questions.” (The Independent, 2002) There is a fact that “There are no laws, medical associations, church denominations, or right-to-life groups who insist that unnecessary, heroic, or truly futile treatments be provided to prolong life and all recognize the right of competent patients to refuse medical treatment.”(Terrisfight). A survey by the NIPO Institute (Netherlands) obtained the result that 76% favored voluntary euthanasia whereas 77% agreed with non voluntary euthanasia meaning killing your dead or mom out of mercy for example.

It is inhuman and unfair to make patients endure the unbearable pain. Assisting a patient to end painful life might be a better choice than demanding that he go on the suffering life. The goal involving euthanasia is to "aid-in-dying" painlessly and therefore should be considered and accepted by lawfully (Dr. Maisie M). The Voluntary Euthanasia Society (EXIT) argues that faced with terminal illness, pain or a useless existence, for which there is no cure, everyone should have a chance to turn to “…..the mercy of a painless death.” They expect that the law will give doctors authority to end the lives of patients who have made it clear that this is what they want.

People who want to die can not be forced to stay alive. We should not make people stay alive only by looking at our perspectives. If a patient with a terminal illness is hover between life and death, it is necessary to allow the patient to speed up the process for a decent death. People falling under the definition of possible euthanasia patients are the patients whose brains are not competent, or bodies are dying. They may think that they would rather die than lead such lives with their bodies in severe pain every day (Amarasekara, 2002). French President Nicholas Sarkozy said in a 2007 campaign speech, "when I hear debates on euthanasia, I tell myself that while I respect the principles, the convictions, at the bottom of my heart I still say there are limits to the suffering that can be imposed on a human."

In conclusion, by considering human right, miserable pain, patient’s wills, we ought to legalize euthanasia. People’s decision should not be influenced by others. Furthermore, it is cruel to see that patients bear so much pain and they can not deal with the pain neither end their life. Also, we should not force people to go on their life if they do not want to. Try to imagine, if one day, we are the one who are kept in the bed and not able to do anything except live with huge pain. We shall not want this endless and painful life, shall we?

Should capital punishment be abolished?

  According to Wikipedia, capital punishment, the death penalty, or execution refers to the sentence of death upon a person by the state as a punishment for an offence. In many places, such as Canada, Australia and so on, the death penalty is a controversial issue. Advocates of the death penalty believe that it is a helpful tool for police and prosecutors. Opponents of capital punishment think that it is against human rights. According to Death Penalty Information Center (updated September 20, 2010), there are 35 states with the death penalty. There are 15 states without the death penalty. 47% people prefer death penalty, and 48% people prefer life without parole. Anton Pavlovich Chekhov who was a major Russian short story writer and playwright said that” Capital punishment kills immediately, whereas lifetime imprisonment does so slowly. Which executioner is more humane? The one who kills you in a few minutes, or the one who wrests your life from you in the course of many years?” Capital punishment should not be abolished because of deterrence, retribution, justice.

Deterrence makes criminals fear so that they will not recidivate in the future. Deterrence stops crime by making punishment more severe than the benefits gained from criminal acts. Capital punishment is necessary for people who intentionally commit murder. Judgers execute capital punishment very carefully. Hence even thou it is not used so often, it still is a threat for potential criminals. According to literature, many people, particularly politicians, indicate that the death penalty is an effective deterrent for the crime of murder (Ellsworth and Ross, 1983; Fagan, 1986; Vidmar and Ellsworth, 1974; Whitehead and Blankenship, 2000; Zeisel and Gallup, 1989). Proponents of the death penalty for deterrence reasons argue that a death sentence is a far more effective deterrent than life imprisonment (Ellsworth and Gross, 1994). If we do not know whether the death penalty will deter others, we will be confronted with two uncertainties . If we have the death penalty and achieve no deterrent effect, than, the life of convicted murderers has been expended in vain (from a deterrent point of view)—here is a net loss. If we have the death sentence, and deter future murderers, we spared the lives of future victims-(the prospective murderers gain, too; they are spared punishment because they were deterred). In this case, the death penalty is a gain, unless the convicted murderer is valued more highly than that of the unknown victim, or victims (Carrington, F., l978).  Interestingly, when there was a interruption on Capital Punishment in the United States, the murder rates increased by 100%.

Retribution is a deserved and severe punishment that is used to adjust the balance of justice. When a murder case happen, the victim is not the only one who suffer, but also the people around the victim will have to live with both the pain of losing the friend or family member and the fact that the person responsible for their loss still lives while the victim does not. Victims cannot avenge themselves, only the law and those closest to the victim can do this. A victim’s family feels that they have the duty to gain justice for the victim. Actually what they want is not only justice, but also retribution. The retribution may not bring the victim back. Nevertheless, it provides peace of mind to people around the victim and shows the power of law. In the Christian Bible, in Leviticus 24: 17-20, “Whoever takes a human life shall surely be put to death. ¹⁸ Whoever takes an animal's life shall make it good, life for life. ¹⁹ If anyone injures his neighbor, as he has done it shall be done to him, ²⁰ fracture for fracture, eye for eye, tooth for tooth”

  People have capital punishment in order to make the world more just. “May the punishment fit the crime.” Personally, I think this is the best definition of justice. Most humans have a desire for justice, and justice protects society from falling into a tyrannous chaos where the individuals are likely to go into the anger, violence, and madness of criminals. For the sake of society’s stability, fair and swift justice must always exist, and the complete removal of people who would destroy that society through crime is absolutely necessary. The death penalty serves this purpose better than any other form of punishment, as it ultimately ensures that a criminal can never harm another person again. From the perspective of justice, the death penalty serves any given populace by erasing its worst element: the criminal one. (Luther Avery,2010) Irwin Isenberg (1977) said, when you kill a man with premeditation, you do something different than stealing from him. “I favor the death penalty as a matter of justice and human dignity even apart from deterrence. The penalty must be appropriate to the seriousness of the crime (p. 135).

  In conclusion, considering about deterrence, retribution, justice, capital punishment should not be abolished. It is not hard to assume that if we abolish the capital punishment, there will be more and more murders. Therefore, I suggest that we should let more people know about the influence of capital punishment and I believe that there will be less murder cases.