Negative Positive
Title: interesting, but I wish it delved deeper
Review: This book gave lots and lots of arguments that were very nice and well thoughtout, but it often seemed that the point-counterpoint "arguing" was a little redundant. The whole book consisted of an article or an event that had to do with the ethics of euthanasia and two people with conflicting views would write why. I wish that the book had some documented dialog between the two opinions. It was a little boring reading the same opinions over and over again. "euthanasia as long as it is consentual and necessary should be permitted yada yada yada" "killing another innocent being should not be permitted at all because it is murder yada yada yada" Each and every writer was very elegant and well spoken, but I simply wish there was more dialog between the two people, not simply between book editors.
Is the review positive or negative? 