> My disagreement is with killing people. I particularly have a problem with killing people who do not wish to die by withholding care because they're no longer useful, too expensive, etc. This is the institutional murder that I'd like to avoid.
> I particularly have a problem with killing people who do not wish to die by withholding care because they're no longer useful, too expensive, etc.
Me too (and I hope I made that clear in my previous comment).
> I'd prefer to err on the side of caution rather than make blanket "right to die" laws. Right to die laws a) expand like all laws do, and b) get misapplied in tragic ways.
They seem to work out pretty well in places like Switzerland.
> I am therefore assuming you are a very dangerous, if well-meaning, person.
In the context of an informal online discussion, I don't see the point in agonizing over the exact wording; I feel that my intent was clear enough in the context of the thread. If someone is of a sound mind, and wishes to end their life through euthanasia, they have the right to do it.
I don't see the "euthanasia" part itself as the "thorny" bit. The details of determining the individual's mental state (i.e. the method of testing their sanity), documenting that, and preventing abuse of the law. But that's the nature of the law; provide protection for citizen's rights, and preventing abuse of those rights.
> I am therefore assuming you are a very dangerous, if well-meaning, person.
I think you're reading too much into a couple sentences typed during my coffee break.