Example Of A Religious Group Against Euthanasia example essay topic

Life or Death There have been many issues through time that were loved by some, and hated by others. For example, people often debate the controversial issue of abortion. This issue is so involved, that it effects people morally, socially, and politically. At local clinics, some people will go as far as to hold protests. These are just some issues that effected people in the past and present ethically. Yet despite these issues, society has continued on.

Euthanasia is an issue that concerns people of all ages in society today. Imagine, if you would, that you had a relative on his death bed with cancer. Their was no possible surgery that could remove the tumor. The doctors say that he could be suffering for days, weeks, or even months before he would pass away. Say that you had a daughter that was in a coma and would not get any better. Just ask yourself, what would you do?

Now, imagine the same relative with the same disease again; only this time the medical industry has suddenly discovered a cure for cancer. Then, the day he was going to be put to death they found a cure for him and he was saved. If you went through with the mercy killing it would have been like murder. Also, how do you think you could handle yourself after knowing that you ended your daughters life? These are some of decisions we are faced with during situations of this nature.

Euthanasia, also mercy killing, is the practice of ending a life so as to release an individual from an incurable disease or intolerable suffering. The term is sometimes used generally to refer to an easy or painless death. Voluntary euthanasia involves a request by the dying patient or that person's legal representative. Passive, or negative, euthanasia involves not doing something to prevent death-that is, allowing someone to die.

Active or positive euthanasia involves taking deliberate action to cause a death (Microsoft Encarta 98). Euthanasia is a controversial issue that deals with religious, legal, and personal aspects. Most religious groups today look at euthanasia as immoral and sinful. For one example, the Christian Bible says, 'Or do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God and you are not your own?

For you were bought at a price therefore glorify God in your body and in your spirit, which are God's. ' (I Corinthians 6: 19-20). This means that since Jesus Christ gave his life for our sins, therefore we owe him our lives in service. This can also be interpreted that since God gave us life that life is his to take away, not ours to do with as we feel is right. Another example of a religious group against euthanasia is Catholicism. 'Causing a death, even to end suffering, is an 'infamy' and thus a crime against humanity' (Tivnan 108).

Also, the Jewish Orthodox says, even if a dying man who has previously refused life-sustaining equipment is in unbearable pain, wants to live no longer, and slips into an irreversible coma, no one has the right to end his life except God (Tivnan 107). This gives a good argument to out-law euthanasia, since it is against mostly every religion imaginable. What these religion's views say is that euthanasia is a bad thing. Yet in some Asian religions, like in the case of Samurai's or Ninja's, if a person was dishonored he must commit suicide or assisted by a friend.

They believed that it was better to die with honor than to suffer with shame. This can be taken into context as early forms of euthanasia. Unlike the other religions, this seems to be the only one that agrees with the idea of euthanasia. The reason why religion plays an important part in society is because it effects the way we think about issues like this. It was once said that religion is nothing but a force to control society. In most countries, euthanasia is illegal and the people who assist in 'mercy killing' can be faced with some jail time and a possible charge of manslaughter.

In most of Europe, Canada, and at least ten states in the United States of America is considered to be illegal. Western laws have generally considered the act of helping someone to die a form of homicide subject to legal sanctions. Even a passive withholding of help to prevent death has frequently been severely punished. For example, there was a case in which Dr. Nancy Morrison was indicted by Canadian prosecutors on charges of manslaughter in the death of a 65-year old cancer patient (Bergman). Also a Canadian judge ruled that a mandatory life sentence for a father who killed his 12-year-old daughter, who was afflicted with cerebral palsy, would be a cruel and unusual punishment (Kondro). These are some reasons against euthanasia and why some people think it should be illegal.

To go along with it being illegal you would have to hear argument against it. Now you have already heard the religious part why euthanasia shouldn't be allowed. Yet other people have different moral ideas and different ways of arguing against it. The medical industry is basically split down the middle between the topic of euthanasia.

The American Medical Association's position on euthanasia is: 'A physician should not intentionally cause a death. ' 'Making doctors killers changes the aims of medicine and the perception of doctors,' says the AMA, 'placing them on the 'slippery slope' of morality. ' (Tivnan 110) No matter how much they might sympathize with a patient's desire to end his life, most doctors are repelled by the prospect of killing someone. Modern technological advances, such as respirators and artificial kidney machines, have made it possible to keep persons alive for long periods of time even when they are permanently or irrevocably brain damaged.

Also, some patients who do not want to die but know they have become such a burden that others, would prefer that they do. More troublesome still is that most candidates for mercy killing are comatose, deformed infants, mentally ill patients, or those suffering from Alzheimer's are in no position to request it. Another procedure of euthanasia is stopping life-sustaining food and fluid. This simply involuntary. When respirators are shut off, some people continue to live, but when but when food and water are cut off, people die. Starvation and dehydration amount to intentional killing by, not incidentally, a cruel, repulsive method.

Although this may seem just, really its inhumane and barbaric. With more than a million critically ill Americans on some form of artificial nutrition each year, the prospect of cutting them off would result in mercy killing of Nazi-like proportions (Tivnan 113). Only when it is medically impossible to provide food or fluid or when providing it would require extreme pain, should a patient be deprived of them. The National Conference of Commissioners on uniform state laws in 1985 adopted the Uniform Rights of the Terminally Ill Act.

This act allows terminally ill patients to opt for euthanasia in about 40 states. Most would agree that a necessary principle in any system of morality would be some version of 'the sanctity of life. ' That is, killing people, by its very nature, is always wrong. Yet, what about capital punishment and killing the enemy during a time of war? Obviously, those who allow for exceptions do not believe that killing is always inherently wrong. To them, killing is generally wrong.

A utilitarian, for instance, bases on his moral decisions on maximizing happiness, so killing someone is wrong because it will deprive him and his family if happiness (Tivnan 115). With arguments like this, you " ve got to think and ask yourself why some things are looked upon as okay. Since people look at capital punishment as okay, then why aren't people be able to end suffering? Euthanasia is a very touchy subject that deals with ideas that are not easily discussed. People can say that religion is right, others look at the legal aspects, while most say they can do what ever they want with life.

The bible says that people shouldn't commit mercy killings. Also, the medical industry is split down the middle about it There are legal and illegal aspects which make it an issue that is still being debated. Personally, I can see why this subject should be outlawed. This brief summary of the topic gives some examples why this is inhumane. People say that people have the right to do what they want with their own lives.

The religious side of it says that we owe our lives to God. I do read the read the Bible and I do agree with the scriptures. No one can tell another how they should feel, yet I hope to have given you some useful information on this topic, so that you can make your own opinion.

Bibliography

Bergman, Brian. 'The Crown Reconsiders. ' Maclean's 17 Nov. 1997'Euthanasia.
Microsoft Encarta 97 Encyclopedia: CD-ROM 1997 Kondro, Wayne.
Reduced Sentence for 'Mercy Killing'. ' Lancet 13 Dec. 1997 Tivnan, Edward.
The Moral Imagination: Confronting the Ethical Issues of Our Day. New York: Simon & Schuster Inc. 1995.