If one is terminally ill, they will die. That's what terminal means.
The right to die when they want, instead of suffering for 2 more years...
It'd be pretty hard to avoid it. Now if you mean do they have the right to self terminate? It may not be legal, but I believe it should be.
Yes...of course...the right to die means a right to die anytime.....not waiting for 10 years of misery.
Yes. No use in prolonging suffering
They don't really have a choice in the matter, the only thing they can choose is to die sooner.
Just curious, would you feel that way if it were a child?
Yes...depending on the amt pain the child has suffered...and is suffering.
I didn't want to put my darling pet to sleep; but I realized she was suffering....
The right to die is not the problem. The problem is the government types can't tolerate anybody dying without their permission.
If someone is terminally ill they have the right to end their own suffering, there is no way out so why deny them
Don't know what 'right' means, do you?
Isn't all about "rights" something that you States ppl have in your Indoctrination...or Proclamation...or something?
Right means straight up, square, correct, the strong arm, a legal privilege. The common meaning to all those things is strength. You have a right to life, but only if you are strong enough to cling to it. You have a right to the space you occupy, but only if you are strong enough to defend it. You have a right to own property, but only if you can guard it from all attackers.
You may obtain the services of a champion to defend your rights, or create a government for that purpose, but of course the champion's loyalty might become a concern, and governments always eventually renege on the contract.
When people start guessing "I think you have a right" that means they wish somebody would step in and protect their whims.
Yes, nobody should have to suffer.