The debate on assisted dying has been one of the most controversial debates to date. Is it fair to assist someone who no longer wishes to live, or is it immoral? There have been cases of people as important as kings dying of euthanasia as a way of preserving their pride. Yet as the British parliament is to debate whether it is okay to help someone die, or it will result in deaths that could have been prevented. But this debate is maybe about to change. In Her article “Assisted dying is an act of kindness we all might need” from The Guardian, Polly Toynbee argues that assisted dying is not only a helping hand to those in strong pain, but also another conquer for human rights. But is she right when she proclaims “assisted dying is an act of kindness we all might need”? Polly Toynbee begins her article by describing what is about happen and then starts critiquing religion “The Christians and other religions are pulling out every organ-stop to prevent it” after assessing that it is the last freedom her generation has yet to won. Her intention of the article is to engage the readers in her political view and get up a vote for a yes to assisted dying, which is a human right following Toynbee’s view. She backs up her view by using statistics, something that is present several times throughout the article …show more content…
On the side, she makes her intention clear and her arguments are well written, yet on the other side her article changes topic often, and it makes the article messy and difficult to understand. She starts by blaming the religious people for the opposition against the bill “but the religious campaigners… are instructed to hide the real nature of their opposition” to arguing against a different argument and back to religious people “Palliative care professionals are heavily dominated by the