Euthanasia is too hard to talk about on a 'public' level. There are way too many variables that can be argued. 'What if they give everyone the right to commit suicide?' 'What age do we initiate 'the right?' 'What diseases qualify or do not qualify?'
The variables make the entire question too cumbersome to debate.
Hospice workers are very compassionate people who- like it or not- euthanize people all of the time. But here's the thing- hospice patients have to 'meet the criteria'
In order to be eligible to receive this service, a beneficiary must:
-be determined to have a terminal illness (which is defined as having a prognosis of 6 months or less if the disease or illness runs its normal course;
-not have made a hospice election, and
-not previously received the pre-election hospice services
Certification or re-certification is based upon a physician’s clinical judgment, and is not an exact science. Congress made this clear in Section 322 of the Benefits Improvement and Protection Act of 2000 (BIPA), which says that the hospice certification of terminal illness “shall be based on the physician’s or medical director’s clinical judgment regarding the normal course of the individual’s illness.”
source:
http://www.nhpco.org/hospice-eligibility-requirements
My point is- euthanasia is already prevalent- it's used on millions of people every year. Morphine stops the heart and makes dying people comfortable. I see no problem with it, and I hope if something horrid happens to me that I will be fortunate enough to have hospice care.
I don't think that anyone will ever agree on Euthanasia in and of itself. Like abortion and the death penalty, there are just too many variables that go into that decision. Just my opinion.