Physician-Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia in the Modern World :: Physician Assisted Suicide

mercy killing and the Modern World A long time ago, culture was habitual and permanent. There was one set of beliefs, ideals, and norms, and these were the standard for all human beings in all places and all times. We, however, live in the modern world. Our ethics be not an inheritance of the past, completed and ready for universal application. We are in the situation of having to form our own beliefs and meanings of life. This struggle is now obvious in the contemporary discussions of euthanasia. Of the controversial discussions involving euthanasia, the question of legalization is an often argued one. Whether euthanasia ought to be illegal is different from the question of whether it is immoral. Some people retrieve that nevertheless if euthanasia is immoral, it still should not be prohibited by law, since if a patient wants to die, that is strictly a personal affair, regardless of how foolish or immoral the desire might be. Rachels, 56 My position is almost identical. I believe there are some instances in which euthanasia is immoral, but I believe it should unquestionably be legal. In the following paragraphs, I willing display the position of the resistor to the legality of euthanasia as sound as the position of the supporters. I shall attempt to prove that, yes, euthanasia should be legal. There is a strong opposition against the legalization of euthanasia. The main ground against the legality of euthanasia is sometimes known as the slippery slant argument. People argue that if euthanasia was legally permitted, it would lead to a general decline in the respect for human life. It is professed that we would kill people in the beginning simply to put them out of extreme agony. This is the ideal. But the opposition states that the killing of people wouldnt stop here. The killing could perhaps escalate to jackpot murder of innocent victims. When would the killing stop? This is what scares the opponent. The opponents argue that once something is accepted, we arouse no right to deny other similar practices. This is when doctors and patients would start winning advantage of the new law. Therefore, the first step should not be taken. I disagree with this notion and believe that there would hardly be any