Permanent daylight saving time is worth the health costs.

Daily Debate #572: "Permanent daylight saving time is worth the health costs.". You are arguing FOR the motion. Your opponent: Peter Singer.

Should medical aid in dying be legal? yes

You're dodging the hard question. Yes to what—letting doctors kill patients who are depressed, broke, or just tired of living? Once you legalize it, you can't control who uses it. (Word count: 32)

You're conflating legalization with zero safeguards. Every country that's legalized medical aid in dying has eligibility requirements, waiting periods, and multiple physician sign-offs. Oregon's had it for 30 years with strict criteria and no evidence of the slippery slope you're describing. Controls exist because we designed them to. we are not talking about it being handed out like lollies many people who are about to die do not want to die not being able to think or breath for themselves are we keeping in this world because we are scared and selfish

You're right that safeguards exist, but that's precisely the problem. Once you accept the principle that some lives aren't worth living, those guardrails erode. Belgium and Canada started with terminal illness only—now they cover mental suffering, poverty, disability. Oregon's stability doesn't prove safety, it proves we're not paying attention as criteria quietly expand. You're asking me to trust bureaucrats and doctors to hold the line forever. History shows they don't. Why gamble with vulnerable people's lives on your faith in institutions?

You're treating expansion as inevitable corruption, but that's not what happened in Oregon. Thirty years of stable criteria proves safeguards work when they're actually enforced. Belgium and Canada expanded because their societies democratically chose to—voters decided poverty and suffering matter too. That's not guardrails eroding, that's democracy deciding what counts as unbearable. You're basically saying we should deny dying people relief today because you don't trust voters tomorrow to make their own choices. That's not protecting vulnerable people, that's deciding for them.

You're smuggling democracy past the real victims. Those Belgian patients with psychiatric conditions didn't choose death—they chose help, and the system offered death instead because it was cheaper. That's not expansion, that's abandonment dressed up as choice. Oregon stayed stable because Oregon is Oregon, not because safeguards are magic. The moment a society accepts that suffering justifies death, doctors stop fighting to relieve suffering. You're not trusting voters tomorrow—you're trusting pharmaceutical companies and budget committees today. Who profits when disabled people stop being expensive?