Other opponents, more willing to join a debate, will say - with a large amount of truth - euthanasia has a negative effect on those left behind.
Hospice workers, who do such excellent work in palliative care, will likely say once their symptoms are relieved the terminally ill come to value whatever life is left to them.
Some people think euthanasia gives too much power to doctors or fear that a right to die could morph into a cost-cutting duty to die for the elderly, with pressure put on them by family, cash-strapped health services or even health insurers.
There are some fair points in the above list but proponents of euthanasia will counter that it is cruel to allow a human to die a long, painful death when their suffering can be ended.
As long as it is with their permission. And it is everyone's right to decide what will happen with their own lives.
Personally, when my life has got beyond its useful-to-me date and I am a burden on people, then I will consider alternatives.
I will discuss it with family and loved ones, but it is my choice.
And that is why we need to debate euthanasia.
Let's look at the issue square-on and talk about it - and I don't mean being shouted at by tunnel-visioned zealots or pressure groups.
A calm, rational debate about people's right to a certain level of dignity as their lives draw to an end.
It should be led by the Government.
However, we all know how gutless politicians are when it comes to euthanasia.
They'll fart about, pay lip-service to "choice", fart about some more, leave it to a private member's bill and then put it to a conscience vote.
Before that happens, the acid will be poured over MPs by opponents who will threaten to end their political careers if they agree to euthanasia and that will ensure the status quo.
What should happen is a referendum to gauge public opinion and then MPs vote on what the people say, not their own consciences - which is an oxymoron if ever there was one.
It is hard to know quite what to say about a situation in Italy where a just-dead Nazi can't find a place to be buried.
Former SS captain Erich Priebke - a man who participated in the massacre of 335 Italian civilians in 1944 - lived until he was 100.
That does raise the issue of the fairness of life where a mass killer leads a long existence after committing an atrocity.
We can only hope it wasn't a happy one.
And it poses the question: should mass murderers be allowed to be buried anywhere?
Prebke has been refused burial in Italy - where he was living under house arrest since his trial in 1995 - and his adopted home of Argentina, where he fled with countless Nazis after World War II, has rejected him.
Even his birthplace in Germany doesn't want him.
So what to do with genocidal mass murderers?
I think they should just get thrown in a rubbish dump, with the other refuse from society.
If Francisco, the eldest brother of the Mexican Arellano-Felix family drug cartel, had been a coulrophobic he could well be alive today.
Unfortunately for him, he wasn't and was assassinated by hitmen ... dressed as clowns.
Coulrophobia - as you all will know - is a fear of those paint-faced, red-nosed, big-footed chaps and chapesses in weird outfits.
Richard Moore is an award-winning Western Bay journalist and photographer.
