More Popular Issues
See how voters are siding on other popular political issues...
Results from Associate's Degree voters
Last answered 59 minutes ago
Distribution of answers submitted by Associate's Degree voters.
Data includes total votes submitted by visitors since Aug 30, 2013. For users that answer more than once (yes we know), only their most recent answer is counted in the total results. Total percentages may not add up to exactly 100% as we allow users to submit "grey area" stances that may not be categorized into yes/no stances.
Education data estimated by matching users to U.S. Census data block groups via the American Community Survey (2007-2011).
Choose a demographic filter
- District of Columbia
- New Hampshire
- New Jersey
- New Mexico
- New York
- North Carolina
- North Dakota
- Rhode Island
- South Carolina
- South Dakota
- West Virginia
* Data estimated by matching users to U.S. Census data block groups via the American Community Survey (2007-2011)
6 years ago by catholicnewsagency.com
6 years ago by net.au
6 years ago by news.com.au
7 years ago by bbc.co.uk
7 years ago by dailymail.co.uk
7 years ago by net.au
Data based on unique submissions (duplicates or multiple submissions are eliminated) per user using a 30-day moving average to reduce daily variance from traffic sources. Totals may not add up to exactly 100% as we allow users to submit "grey area" stances that may not be categorized into yes/no stances.
More stances on this issue
Yes, but lethal injection shouldn't be the means if that means a doctor is needed to give the injection. 7 years ago from a Green in Lake Mary, FL
Yes it should be allowed; however there needs to be certain circumstances. One, Death must be in a smaller time period than a 6 months; Two, There needs to be a meeting with all family to help make official decision; Three, There must be paper worked... 7 years ago from a Republican in Canton, OH
Lethal injection is "overkill" (no pun intended), they should be able to easily swallow or inhale a poison unassisted, and they should have counseling to discuss how often doctors give bad advice. Insurance must not cover the cost; no other... 7 years ago from a Libertarian in La Porte, IN
They should be able to get help ending their lives in as easy a way as possible, whether lethal injection or the use of drugs. 7 years ago from a Green in Galveston, TX
They should and can refuse treatment , which includes food and fluids,oxygen and any medications other than those for pain, be put on a morphine drip and be allowed to die without any life saving interventions that would only mean more suffering. 7 years ago from a Democrat in Greendale, WI
As long as the person is 110% sure this is what they want, once you do it you can't change your mind. 7 years ago from a Democrat in Belleville, IL
Lethal injection maybe the wrong choice. In Oregon there are two ways terminally ill patients have to choose from to end their life when their health starts to severely decline and dignity is lost. These options are discussed with their treating physician... 7 years ago from a Democrat in Altamonte Springs, FL
Yes, But only with 100% certainty from themselves and family. 7 years ago from a Democrat in De Witt, IA
Yes to the right to die; method should include oral options as well. Adequate safeguards need to be in place to minimize predatory practices by family & guardians. A difficult issue to summarize here. 7 years ago from a Democrat in Bandon, OR
Yes after physchologial exam and no chancy of recovery. 7 years ago from a Republican in La Porte, IN
Yes after physchological exam and zero chance of recovery. 7 years ago from a Republican in La Porte, IN
This is between a person and his God. 7 years ago from a Republican in Dallas, TX
Yes after psychological exam and investigation of financial motives of family. 7 years ago from a Democrat in Garland, TX
Not a political question. Between patient and doctor. 7 years ago from a Libertarian in Fairview Village, PA
It should be up to the individual their family and doctors. 7 years ago from a Republican in Fountain, CO
Yes but Only after the insurance companies like Blue Cross and their self serving front group compasionandchoices.org is removed from the training, protocol, and law crafting of MOLST. (see it's initiation in New York) Also the public and health care providers need to understand the just how terminal a "terminal illness" is anyway. Illnesses are much more terminal when insurance companies don't want to pay for them and the same insurance company initiates legislation mandating that a doctor discuss MOLST which is tantamount to euthanasia. Most patients will do what their doctor steers them to do, and they will think they are making their own choice.
MOLST stands for Medical Orders for Life Sustaining Treatment. 7 years ago from a Socialist in Coronado, CA
The right to die, especially by the terminally ill, is a personal decision. The government should not have a role preventing a person who make this decision, other than to ensure that those involved (other than the patient) do not have other motivations.... 7 years ago from a Green in La Mesa, CA