Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2017 13:51:26 GMT
Euthanasia does not impose an ethical responsibility to kill someone else. If there are people who are willing to assist in helping someone else to die, but the government withholds it (likely at the behest of religious medievalists), then that is an egregiously unethical state of affairs. That's almost what I said. However, to say a government is wrong by withholding it is exactly the same thing as saying government has an responsibility to allow it which is incorrect. They didn't have to do anything and a person can off themselves freely without a government sign-off. The person who feels a need to help people like that simply accepts the risk. Likewise, to expect the Pope to comment on it in the form of modern ethicism would in effect put an ethics expectation on it when there is none. If the Pope is against it, there is nothing wrong with that. Of course, the thread title may be non-factual (I couldn't pull up the article) or a play on words, but taking it at face value, it sounds like something a Pope would say and there is no ethical issue in him saying it. There's quite an important distinction. When euthanasia or assisted suicide is illegal, then that is a case of the government actively interfering with the bodily autonomy of its subjects. If euthanasia or assisted suicide is legal, then that doesn't mean that you have to kill your next door neighbour just because he asks you to. It means that if your neighbour can find a doctor who is willing to prescribe the Nembutal, the doctor cannot be prosecuted.
|
|