Euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide should not be legalized. These two practices are a violation of human dignity (Rachels, J. & Rachels,2015). All men are created equal and are endowed by the creator with certain an inalienable right among these is life, and every human being has inherent and equal fundamental dignity and basic right. Human dignity does not depend on subject evaluation of worth as human dignity is intrinsic. The recognition of human dignity is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world hence legalizing euthanasia may be equivalated to taking away the freedom, peace and justice in the world.
Physician assisted suicide and euthanasia overlook the possibility finding a cure. There are medical research and breakthrough often in the field of medicine and science. These new findings may offer patients who are viewed to be terminally ill the hope to have a new life where they either recover or the diseases that they have can be managed so that they lead a normal life. Euthanasia takes away completely the possibility of such patients to enjoy such a possibility by taking away their life. There is also the risk of abuse of euthanasia and physician assisted suicide when it is legalized. It may crate a loophole for people’s life to be taken or one to take their life for personal reasons other than medical reasons.
The main argument from nature is that euthanasia is wrong as it is equivalated to taking someone’s life which is not approved no matter the situation. The same argument is extended in religion. Religion sees life as a sacred gift given to man by God, and it is only God that has the right to take the life back (“Religious Perspectives On Euthanasia – Institute of Clinical Bioethics”, 2014). Taking a life then, despite the circumstances, is viewed as wrong and even punishable. A supporter of euthanasia, however, looks at this on the mercy side. They may argue that there is no humanity in watching someone go through so much pain and someone who is in a position to help does not help them, as religion call also for mercy.
Euthanasia has effects on the medical profession as they are called to protect life and taking away that life is against the oath of office they took. However, in some instances, helping a patient who clearly stated for example not to be resuscitated may lead to legal actions against the medical practitioner. From the utilitarian perspective of mercy, there are some instances where the patient should be put out of their pain especially when they eventually succumb to the disease.
Homosexuality is not immoral. Homosexuality does not go against any ethical values today. It is however the thinking of many people around the world that homosexuality is unethical, but looking at the facts of ethics, it does not go against them. This thinking by people may be because they find the topic on it awkward, they hold on arguments that have been given in the past and do not understand the changing minds in the society.
The convincing argument is that there is no any particular genuine harm that is caused to individual or the society by homosexuality. In fact, it is the society that causes harm to homosexual individuals by discriminating against them which has resulted to increased cases of teen suicide and bullying.
The argument of homosexuality being unnatural is not convincing. In the case that homosexuality was unnatural as some people claim especially the catholic church, it would not be happening among the animal kingdom. There are also world cultures that have been practicing homosexuality for many years and find it quite okay and normal to them. Furthermore, the argument on being unnatural does not address the morality of the discussion.
Euthanasia should not be legalized. I found several arguments on this convincing, including restricting possibility of cure, violation of human dignity and potential abuses. I believe that in the world we are living today there are many advisements that can ensure one is comfortable enough, example induced coma, as they explore other potentials for the patient. New findings on a disease may bring about cure or different ways of managing the disease that a patient can enjoy which may not be the case if they end their life or are assisted to do the same
The argument on mercy does not hold strongly especially in this century of technological advancement. Mercy invokes on feeling of compassion so that they can take someone out of their misery and allow them rest. However, there are several medal procedures today that would do the same without necessarily ending the life of an individual. These alternatives would be sought in such case, as they find a way out or wait for a patient to die naturally.
Religion plays an important role in the society especially on how people interpret and understand different concepts in the society. However, it does not comprehensively analyses and deal with issues which may make individuals hold onto concepts that do not have strong grounds. Example on the issue of immorality, religion does not provide any empirical evidence on why homosexuality is immoral.
Rachels, J. & Rachels, S. (2015) The right thing to do (7th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill
Religious Perspectives On Euthanasia – Institute of Clinical Bioethics. (2014). Retrieved 16 May 2020, from https://sites.sju.edu/icb/religious-perspectives-on-euthanasia/