（！）安乐死是杀人。
每一个生命是如此的重要。
人不能只为自己而活，但他们也活在他们的家庭和社会。
如果他们选择离开这个世界，他们不为自己负责，他们的家庭和社会。
安乐死是轻视生命。
生命是如此的珍贵。
患者应该珍惜自己的生命。
他们应该尽力战胜绝症。
每个人都应该表现出对生命的基本尊重。
无论发生什么，我们应该面对事实，我们应该生活在巨大的勇气，我们应该相信奇迹。
没有什么是不可能的。
我们认为，安乐死不应legeled（！）安乐死停药的发展。
如果患者需要使用安乐死，医生不会尽力挽救病人。
这药会停止进步。
如果安乐死合法化，安乐死的病人使用将受到法律保护。
医生的权利将是显而易见的。
医生有太多的权力，可以是错误的或不道德的。
病人把自己的信仰和信任医生的意见。
人们滥用安乐死合法化时，它会危害人的生命。
在安乐死的名义，进行自杀。
能发生奇迹般的治疗或复苏。
你永远不能低估了人的精神力量。
它把人的生命价值。
在这个国家，人的生命意味着什么。
它可以打开闸门非危重病人自杀和滥用。
任何松动的协助自杀的法律最终可能导致特权的滥用。
许多宗教禁止自杀和他人的故意杀人。
最基本的戒律是“不可杀人”。
保险公司可以把不必要的压力，避免孤注一掷的措施或建议医生协助自杀的过程。
健康保险提供者保持保费下降在巨大的压力下。
安乐死可以成为一种手段，遏制医疗成本。
医生和其他医护人员不应参与直接导致死亡。
安乐死在道德上是不正确的，应该被法律所禁止的。
这是一个杀人和杀害别人不能合理化在任何情况下。
人的生命是特殊的安全保护。
先进的医疗技术已经使得有可能提高人类的寿命和生活质量。
姑息治疗和康复中心是更好的选择来帮助残疾人或病人接近死亡生活的痛苦自由和更好的生活。
家庭成员的影响病人的决定为安乐死以权谋私喜欢财富传承是另一个问题。
你是没有办法可以知道是否真的对协助自杀是自愿或被迫由别人决定。
安乐死会导致医疗保健和最脆弱的社会造成受害下降。
将安乐死将自己从“死的权利”，“杀”吗？如何评估是否有心理性障碍使安乐死？如果疼痛阈值低于最优和病人感知的情况下是不值得活吗？如何知道死的愿望是不平衡的思维过程或精神病患者的逻辑决定的结果？如果个人选择协助自杀作为一种选择和家人不同意吗？面对离别，无奈，失去自控，死亡和悲伤，恐惧，所以多数患者会经历精神上的痛苦。
在这种心理需求下的“安乐死”，我们可以说他是合理的吗？”根据研究自杀，自杀和治愈的精神疾病本质上是相关的，但不是致命的疾病，研究发现，在44例晚期癌症患者，只有三想过自杀，但有一个严重的抑郁症。
另一项研究表明，85的人自杀，只有一个人患了绝症，和90-100%的自杀都患有明显的心理疾病。
不可否认，现代医学实践中缓慢死亡的过程中，经常提到的病人梅，尊严个人特色的丧失，独立性和自主性。
然而，安乐死是个人的自主行为表达，这是错误的。
原因：（一）自主动安乐死需要帮助，那么它就不是一个人的事情，而是开放的或公共的东西。
（b）在公开承认自卫，战争的形式正义，死刑和谋杀，只为大家保卫生命，不被杀死的人的利益。
所以，即使死亡是痛苦的解脱，不能轻易带走生命权致力于个人。
（C）即使人的自决权确认选择死亡，这并不意味着权利要求别人杀死自己，并不包括有权授权自杀别人。
（D）自治，包括奴隶制的权利从来不是自己的，换句话说，这(!)Euthanasia is to kill people. Life is so important for every one. People don’t only live for themselves, but they also live for their families and the society. If they choose to leave the world, they are not responsible for themselves, their families and the society.Euthanasia is disparagement of life. Life is so precious. Patients should cherish their life. They should try their best to prevail incurable disease. Everyone should show basic respect for life. No matter what happens, we should face up to the facts, we should live on with great courage, we should believe in wonder. Nothing is impossible.so we view that Euthanasia should not be legeled(!)Euthanasi a stops the medicine developing. If the patients require using euthanasia, doctors won’t try their best to save patients. The medicine will stop progress. If making euthanasia is made legal, patients who use euthanasia will be protected by law. The doctors’ right will be obvious. Doctors are given too much power, and can be wrong or unethical. Patients put their faith and trust in the opinions of their doctor.people abuse euthanasia when it is legalized, it can harm people lives. In the name of euthanasia, carry out committing suicide. Miracle cures or recoveries can occur. You can never underestimate the power of the human spirit.It demeans the value of human life. In this country, human life means something.It could open the floodgates to non-critical patient suicides and other abuses. Any loosening of the assisted-suicide laws could eventually lead to abuses of the privilege.Many religions prohibit suicide and the intentional killing of others. The most basic commandment is "You shall not kill".Insurance companies may put undue pressure on doctors to avoid heroic measures or recommend the assisted-suicide procedure. Health insurance providers are under tremendous pressure to keep premiums down.Euthanasia can become a means of health care cost containment..Physicians and other medical care people should not be involved in directly causing death.Mercy killing is morally incorrect and should be forbidden by law.It's a homicide and murdering another human cannot be rationalized under any circumstances.Human life deserves exceptional security and protection. Advanced medical technology has made it possible to enhance human life span and quality of life. Palliative care and rehabilitation centers are better alternatives to help disabled or patients approaching death live a pain-free and better life. Family members influencing the patient's decision into euthanasia for personal gains like wealth inheritance is another issue. There is no way you can be really sure if the decision towards assisted suicide is voluntary or forced by others.Mercy killing would cause decline in medical care and cause victimization of the most vulnerable society. Would mercy killing transform itself from the "right to die" to "right to kill"?How would one assess whether a disorder of mental nature qualifies mercy killing? What if the pain threshold is below optimum and the patient perceives the circumstances to be not worthy of living? How would one know whether the wish to die is the result of unbalanced thought process or a logical decision in mentally ill patients? What if the individual chooses assisted suicide as an option and the family wouldn't agree?As to face the parting, helplessness, loss of self-control, fear of death and sorrow and so the majority of patients will experience mental suffering. In this psychological requirement under the "Euthanasia", we can say that he is reasonable? "According to the study of suicide, suicide and treatable mental illness is intrinsically related, but not the fatal disease, a study found that in 44 patients with advanced cancer, only three thought about suicide, but are there is a serious depression. Another study shows that 85 suicides, only one person suffering from terminal illness, and 90-100% of the suicides were suffering from obvious mental illness.Undeniably, the modern medical practice slow death process, often cited the loss of personal characteristics of patients Mei, dignity, independence and autonomy.However, the expression of active euthanasia as acts of personal autonomy, it is wrong. Reasons: (a) Since active euthanasia need help, then it is not an individual matter, but the open or in the public thing. (B) under the public recognition to self-defense, capital punishment and justice in the form of war, murder, only to defend the life for everyone, not to the benefit of those killed. So, even if deathis painful relief, can not be lightly taken away the right to life committed to personal. (C) even if the person's self-determination recognized the right to choose to die, that does not mean the right to ask others to kill themselves, does not include the right to authorize self to kill others. (D) autonomy, including the right of slavery has never been their own, in other words, the right to freedom does not mean the right not to freedom.So to maintain the autonomy, the need to protect life, to give others their right to life is not trampling the principle of maintaining independence. Therefore, individual autonomy and social need and public objectives and values to be consistent.所以要保持自主性，需要保护的生命，给他人的生命权是不践踏独立自主的原则。