What are the benefits for legalizing euthanasia?

This is a touchy and controversial issue, and there really are no pros, but there are a lot of cons. The only possible pro would be knowing a loved one was no longer in pain, but consider the following:

For the one who authorized the euthanization of a terminally ill person (or did it themselves), what would the emotional consequences be for them in the long run? Would the guilt eventually get too hard for them to handle? Many of us feel guilty having to have our pet euthanized, even though we know it's the right thing to do, and suffer feelings of guilt long afterwards. Multiply this exponentially and try to imagine the feelings of guilt and remorse that euthanizing a person would evoke.

If this were to be legalized, who is to say some of the "less ethical" wouldn't find a way to use it to have someone "euthanized" who really was not terminally ill, or who actually did have a chance of full recovery (as in a coma)? Greed, especially if there is money involved, as in life insurance, can be a nasty thing.

And a final thought: Even though it may be done with good intentions, it is still taking a life. And since God is the only one who can give life, only God has the right to take that life.

A different view:

To say there are no pros to euthanasia only shows there was no consideration to the opposing side.

First off there are pros to euthanasia. The medical supplies being used on a terminally ill patient could be used for a patient who is more likely to recover. It would also allow the patient to pass on in a dignified and pain free manner. This controlled death would also allow families to say their farewells and allow the family to deal with any "lose ends".

Yes it is possible for an immoral person to euthanize someone against their will, but with strongly enforced regulations this would be prevented. Some patients may choose euthanization simply because they have lost hope which is another reason why there would have to be a strict set of rules that the doctors, patients, and the patient's families would have to abide by.

Rules: The choice to be euthanized must be that of the patients only. There must be a minimum of three witnesses (not including the doctor and one of which must have no personal gain from the person dying) present when the patient makes this decision. There would have to be a waiting time after the patients decision to give the patient some time to contemplate their decision; the patient must give consent to euthanization before and after this period with witnesses present. The patient must be terminally ill and all other methods of treatment should be exhausted before euthanasia becomes an option. Insurance companies cannot stop coverage if a patient refuses euthanization.

Finally I want to comment on an argument left by the previous poster.

"And a final thought: Even though it may be done with good intentions, it is still taking a life. And since God is the only one who can give life, only God has the right to take that life."

This argument is not valid and ultimately boils down to whether god exists or not. I am not here to prove one way or the other but you cannot deny people the right to be euthanized based off of your beliefs, especially when the patients beliefs a different from yours. (I'm sure someone will think or post something like "allowing euthanasia is the same as allowing murder." Well that is just not true. Murder brings zero benefits to humanity where euthanasia does.)