The WSJ article is right; assisted-suicide is murder, plain and simple.
I’m greatly disturbed by the creeping influence of intentionality in certain issues, like assisted-suicide and abortion. When a doctor helps kill a patient who wants it, we think think that’s fine, but when the patient doesn’t want it then it’s murder. When a woman wants the child, then its a person and any attempt on the mother’s life is also treated as an attempt on the child’s; but when the child is unwanted then it’s life is forfeit.
The actions are the same and should be treated as such. This redefinition of reality to suit our comfort is degrading to our civilization and our humanity.
Physicans are able to get away with so many things (assisted-suicide, prescription of drugs for unecessary reasons, etc) just because of their profession. Yet, a very small number of people can actually see beyond what’s in front of them…physicians helping terminate someone’s live.
One quote from the article pretty much sums it all up “If a lifeguard helped people drown…would you want him watching your family at the beach?” and, for me, that would be an aboslute NO. Same thing with physicians, why would anybody want to be treated for a specific condition by a doctor who thinks it’s okay to help kill people that, for whatever reason, don’t want to live any longer. It’s disturbing, to say the least.
Physicians are in a unique position to understand when situation warrants it. If those analogies qualify as brilliant..
Anyway, these patients are vetted to make sure that it’s not psychological urging. Regardless of anyone elses opinion about the morality of it, who are we to tell someone they need to suffer because we take some a priori high ground?
Kyle, I am inclined to agree with you. At what point are we allowed to selfishly tell someone that they must keep fighting? Often, it is the family that pushes to keep someone alive beyond their wishes, necessitating the need for such things as DNR orders.
@Steve, I’m calling reductio ad absurdum there. I think you know my argument holds more nuance to that, but by your stated interpretation theft and a business transaction are the same.
In regards to the suffering of patients, all I can say is welcome to life. The human condition is one of suffering. This idea that some suffering is more legitimate or severe, and thus constitutes a reason to end one’s own life, is a threat to our very valuation of human life in the first place. I also find it amazing that the desire to keep someone alive is termed “selfish”.
So is it “compassionate” or “merciful” to kill people in the third world because their lives will be nothing but suffering? What bothers me is that these arguments in favor of assisted suicide need not be confined to situations with doctors or the desire to end ones own life.
Life has an objective, intrinsic, and indivisible value. It always contains this value, no matter what the situation or actions of the person might be. When we mitigate the value of life because of the fear of pain we start down a dark road where anyone is free to debate the intrinsic value of life, rather than holding it paramount to all else.
The WSJ article is right; assisted-suicide is murder, plain and simple.
I’m greatly disturbed by the creeping influence of intentionality in certain issues, like assisted-suicide and abortion. When a doctor helps kill a patient who wants it, we think think that’s fine, but when the patient doesn’t want it then it’s murder. When a woman wants the child, then its a person and any attempt on the mother’s life is also treated as an attempt on the child’s; but when the child is unwanted then it’s life is forfeit.
The actions are the same and should be treated as such. This redefinition of reality to suit our comfort is degrading to our civilization and our humanity.
^ Agree
The analogies made on this article are brilliant!
Physicans are able to get away with so many things (assisted-suicide, prescription of drugs for unecessary reasons, etc) just because of their profession. Yet, a very small number of people can actually see beyond what’s in front of them…physicians helping terminate someone’s live.
One quote from the article pretty much sums it all up “If a lifeguard helped people drown…would you want him watching your family at the beach?” and, for me, that would be an aboslute NO. Same thing with physicians, why would anybody want to be treated for a specific condition by a doctor who thinks it’s okay to help kill people that, for whatever reason, don’t want to live any longer. It’s disturbing, to say the least.
The real question behind assisted suicide is the morality of suicide. And that question is very difficult to debate.
“The actions are the same and should be treated as such. ”
Consensual sex and rape should be treated the same?
Steve
Physicians are in a unique position to understand when situation warrants it. If those analogies qualify as brilliant..
Anyway, these patients are vetted to make sure that it’s not psychological urging. Regardless of anyone elses opinion about the morality of it, who are we to tell someone they need to suffer because we take some a priori high ground?
Good analogy, Steve.
Kyle, I am inclined to agree with you. At what point are we allowed to selfishly tell someone that they must keep fighting? Often, it is the family that pushes to keep someone alive beyond their wishes, necessitating the need for such things as DNR orders.
@Steve, I’m calling reductio ad absurdum there. I think you know my argument holds more nuance to that, but by your stated interpretation theft and a business transaction are the same.
In regards to the suffering of patients, all I can say is welcome to life. The human condition is one of suffering. This idea that some suffering is more legitimate or severe, and thus constitutes a reason to end one’s own life, is a threat to our very valuation of human life in the first place. I also find it amazing that the desire to keep someone alive is termed “selfish”.
So is it “compassionate” or “merciful” to kill people in the third world because their lives will be nothing but suffering? What bothers me is that these arguments in favor of assisted suicide need not be confined to situations with doctors or the desire to end ones own life.
Life has an objective, intrinsic, and indivisible value. It always contains this value, no matter what the situation or actions of the person might be. When we mitigate the value of life because of the fear of pain we start down a dark road where anyone is free to debate the intrinsic value of life, rather than holding it paramount to all else.