Anonymous
Anonymous asked in Society & CultureReligion & Spirituality · 7 years ago

EUTHANASIA --- Free-will to choose should never infringe on Right-to-Life --- disagree/agree?

Question posted yesterday was:

Which country were you born in and what are your views on the dilemma of Euthanasia?

I was born in Australia and my views are:

• Euthanasia is illegal in Australia

• Euthanasia without consent is illegal World-wide

• Euthanasia without consent is premeditated murder

Euthanasia v Right-to-Life/Death and Free-will for all to choose --- what are your views?

Update:

Euthanasia without permission/consent is definitely premeditated murder - there must be more honest, open discussion to ensure everyone's safety.

We all have Rights, and Free-will should enable us to exercise our own Rights as "individuals" within the confines of the law...

Thanks to everyone!

10 Answers

Relevance
  • 7 years ago
    Best Answer

    I was born in Scotland, and I'm not sure if the English laws on euthanasia (as Paul explained) are the same in Scotland. Here are my views on the subject:

    Life - all life - is sacred to God

    No person has the right to take a life

    To deliberately take the life of a person who has not consented, is premeditated murder.

  • Paul
    Lv 7
    7 years ago

    In the UK, assisting suicide is illegal, and euthanasia is covered under that. Even if the assistance you give is helping them onto a plane to Sweden so they can visit a Dignitas clinic - you'll be arrested when you get back one family member short.

    Personally I think that's outrageous. Obviously, people have a right to life, a right I take extremely seriously, but when they no longer wish to have it any more, why should they be forced to linger? Animals are regularly put to sleep when they get painful, debilitating and incurable diseases; in fact it's considered extremely cruel not to do so.

    I have had experience with a close family member's death, and it's not the death that bothers me so much as their condition leading up to it. If I could have saved them any time living in the state I witnessed them in, I would have... Except for one thing. The person in question wouldn't have wanted it in any way, and I couldn't go against their wishes. Consent should always be paramount - you can't just go around killing people you consider past it.

    That event made me adamant that if ever I'm in a similar state (which is entirely possible, damn genetics), I wouldn't want to merely exist. I'd want my life to end when it still meant something. Can I speak for anyone besides myself? Of course not. But it should definitely be an option, phrased in a will, maybe, when we are of sound mind and body, that if if ever certain terminal conditions are met, we'd wish our lives to end. And it goes without saying that the people who help us achieve this wouldn't be treated as criminals for their act of kindness.

  • David
    Lv 5
    7 years ago

    Thou Shalt Not Kill. That's plain enough, I think.

    Euthanasia and abortion are killing. The taking of life, by any definition, is killing. Man has defined killing into categories or murder, premeditated murder or manslaughter.

    God defined killing into 2 categories. Life for life, either by the governing priests or by the avenger of blood, in the event of a willful killing, and murder.

    So, in the end, there is no right to life/death in free will.

  • 7 years ago

    It's not something i really like to consider but, if one reaches the point where the quality of their life is permanently in the toilet. (co nstant agony, barely able to move, unable to eat or keep yourself clean, being something to simply wipe down and store in a room so people can gawk and think how badly they feel for you) well then maybe, the individual in question should have a choice. It's not a fun thing to think about.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 7 years ago

    We consider it humane and kindness to put an animal that is clearly suffering out of its misery.

    We consider it humane and kindness that animals we use for food be slaughtered quickly with as little stress, suffering or fear as possible.

    Yet we consider it cruel to grant someone's wish to die with dignity instead of lie in their own **** and suffer excrutiating pain every single day until the day they finally die.

    We find it "merciful" to keep a dead person (under any other cirumstances) artifically alive.

    Our problem is a fear of death and not being able to LET GO.

  • Anonymous
    7 years ago

    I do think it should be legal, only it should be nobody's decision but the person concerned themselves and there should be sanity testing obviously.

    If there is going to be living in pain and no cure then what is the point?

    It's kinder to let them go.

  • Anonymous
    7 years ago

    I support a terminally ill persons right to choose whether to live or die.

  • 7 years ago

    I don't see what children in Asia have to do with that.

  • 7 years ago

    Kill them all at birth I say.

  • Anonymous
    7 years ago

    ill decide for me and ill let you decide for you mkay?

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.