A Choice Essay: Euthanasi It's A Choice

Euthanasia: It’s a Choice
Euthanasia, in Alex’s argument, is connected to being against human nature, dying without dignity, and creating disrespectfulness to oneself. I will reconstruct an argument for the conclusion to prove it is not a sound argument by countering the two main arguments: euthanasia goes against human nature and does not allow a dignified death, by explaining how decisions and the ability to make them invalidate these arguments.
In this paper, certain concessions have to be made such as, euthanasia is a practice where someone dies. It is not murder, because the recipient of the treatment elects to have it done. Involuntary euthanasia is something else entirely, and will be not covered in this paper. Another concession

Humans are animals. Survival is a basic need; however, surviving is not our only goal in life anymore. (G. Williams, 97-102) Because of our advanced technology, we can choose not only how we survive, but the extent of our quality of life. Surviving is only the bare minimum. One of the very things that is human is the power of decision- mainly, the power of choice. Human nature, or characteristics that make us human, is defined in this context as being able to make decisions, right or wrong. Decisions that best suit us are the driving power of what makes humans human. They can range from what jacket to wear to having kids and, tying into this argument, if euthanasia is right in the given situation.
Assume the norm of society is, there are no fatal accidents, defining accidents as some unexpected occurrence. Every death is predicted. A hat contains a slip of paper that contains each name of all the people on Earth. Every day, the people that will die that day are picked out of that hat. Sick people have the same amount of chance as a healthy child to die. All deaths are random and picked on a day to day basis. With all this uncertainty, people cannot make long-term goals or plans for the future. They do not a choice or even the slightest idea of when they are going to die. They do not have a

God does. That being said, this argument does not hold. God is caring and selfless. He/She does not want us living a life in agony. That would be evil and not in our best interest. God, being the ruler of all, would want what is best for us. Assuming that God wants what is in our best interest, He/She would allow the use of euthanasia if it is in our best interest.
Euthanasia gives people a choice, rather than facing the degenerative effects of disease or old age. Euthanasia is life or death. The fear of the unknown or what happens afterwards is replaced by the agony of living. If life is too painful and the quality of life is extremely low, humans are left with no choice but to make a choice. Both types of euthanasia contribute to the choice that all people have a right to. It also ends the suffering of someone that has a malady or a chronic condition. People exercising the right to choose or not choose their life’s end date are doing so, because they lay claim to their life. They have free will, regardless of their religious beliefs. Because they have free will, people can choose to make that verdict however they wish. Human nature, or actions and characteristics that are human, entails making decisions, whether they are wrong or right. Euthanasia does not save lives; it gives them