Imagine that your dog suffering unimaginable pain. The vet has no way of relieving this terrible state she is in. Her eyes look so sad. Hearing her moans are unbearable. She's restless and can't get comfortable no matter which way she lays. She can no longer eat and all her bodily functions are failing. Anyone who loves her pets would not want her to continue living life like this. Killing another person can be a justifiable act the case of euthanasia, military ethics, and George and Lennie.
Euthanasia is a humane way to end the life of someone suffering. For example,” Advocates for physician assisted dying said it is important for people who are suffering intolerable pain to have the option of dying as dignified as possible” (Warren). …show more content…
For other words, “ People who threaten to harm the innocent thereby forfeit their own right not to be killed” (Misurelli). This quote proves anyone who stands in their way maybe legally harmed. Therefore, “ The country has the right to defend itself against aggression by both national and international laws....” ( Frank). With is in mind, it is their duty to keep citizens safe.
George’s act of killing Lennie was a justifiable act because he didn't want Lennie to suffer. In this case, “ I’m gonna shoot the guts outta that big bastard myself…” (Steinbeck 98). This passage shows that George didn't want Lennie to have a painful death. Important to realize, “ An’s’ pose as they lock him up an’ strap him down and put him in a cage, that ain’t no good, George” ( Steinbeck 97). In other words George never wanted Lennie to be treated poorly or be harmed, he wanted Lennie to be cared for, but since he killed Curley's wife they are no out looking for him. George can no longer protect Lennie, he rather end his life with happy feelings, than to suffer a terrible death.
To conclude, killing is justifiable when it is a better of two outcomes. If dying is inevitable the less painful way is preferred. Even though, killing morality wrong, when asked, most people would want painless way out. Our future people should not be in pain when their natural life
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
He begins with comparing pro-life and pro-choice arguments, commenting that they are largely similar and have comparable issues. Marquis points out many fallacies both parties fall subject to, such as Feinberg and Quinlan. He also accuses them of making accidental generalizations. A few pages in, Marquis begins his own analysis on these arguments.
Euthanasia should be permitted everywhere around the world because all individuals have the right to determine their future either by choosing death or the right to live. For instance, in the novel Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck the companionship of Candy and his dog is very strong as they stay together all day long. Candy’s dog has become very old and weak in which he is forced to give up his life since he was no use. According to the text, “He ain’t no good to you, Candy. An’ he ain’t no good to himself.
George does not want Lennie to die, but he knows he will either way, and Curley’s wrath would be a much more agonizing way for him to go than a quick painless shot to the head in a nice location with his best friend. Before leaving to shoot Lennie, George confesses to Candy that Lennie’s optimism about the ranch dream had convinced him that it was possible too. Steinbeck describes, “‘He pulled the trigger… Lennie jarred, and then settled slowly forward to the sand, and he lay without quivering,’” (Steinbeck 106).
The quote shows that If George did not have Lennie, maybe he could have a better life more than this because he does not have to take care of Lennie and he can live his life without get in trouble. George had done the right thing. He should kill Lennie because Lennie cannot control his mind because of his mental problem even he did not mean to do the thing that he have done but George might have the better life If he did not have to take care of Lennie and at last if George did not kill Lennie, Curley will shoot Lennie. However Lennie is going to die in someday and It is better choice if Lennie gets killed by George not the other
George killing Lennie and if it was justified or condemned is a very controversial discussion and could go either way. So think about these factors and ask yourself the question if what George did was justified or
If George didn’t kill Lennie, then he would have to die in a suffering way. Meaning, Lennie dying in the hands of Curley would be suffering. Since George accidentally killed Curley's wife there was no other way to save him. Even if both of them do escape, Lennie would never safe and both of them would still be hunted down. Lennie would have to die either way and George loved Lennie too much to let him die within the hands of Curley.
George would protect Lennie at all costs even from himself. After Lennie kills a young woman, George decides it is better for Lennie to be dead rather than to be tortured and kept in a cell or a mental asylum. The decision of killing Lennie hit George like a train, but he knew it was something that was in Lennie’s own good. Knowing he could have an easier life without Lennie, George still kept him around because he needed George and George needed Lennie. George tells Slim “Course Lennie’s a God damn nuisance most of the time, but you get used to goin’ around with a guy an’ you can’t get rid of him.”
In the novella, Of Mice and Men, by John Steinbeck, George’s decision to kill Lennie at the end of the novel was justified. George and Lennie were best friends, and have been since they were little. They got ran out of Weed(the old farm they used to work at) for harassing a girl and not letting her go. He was just scared from her screaming and kicking. He didn’t mean to harm, or scare her.
Killing another seems very unjustifiable, which might be the case but when someone takes another 's life and sent to prison, death row or capital punishment is needed to put that person were they belong. People like that deserve to die because of their mistake of killing another and it deters other people to not kill others, showing them what would happen. In the case of Capital Punishment, Hunting for Sport, or George and Lennie, killing is a justifiable act. In the case of capital punishment killing is justified and needs to be done. For example, “Some crimes are so inherently evil they demand strict penalties up to and including death”(McClatchy).
George’s decision to kill Lennie was ultimately for his benefit. “The hand shook violently, but his (George) face set and his hand steadied. He pulled the trigger” (Steinbeck 106). The quote which states how Lennie dies also shows that George was nervous and hesitant in killing Lennie. Scarseth explains in the article, “Friendship.
(Foot, p.100) She further justifies this argument by stating that as long as we put into consideration the interests of the person involved and only the benefits of that person that euthanasia can morally acknowledge. I believe that it
Voluntary euthanasia is legitimate in a few nations and U.S. states. Non-voluntary euthanasia is illicit in all nations. Automatic euthanasia is generally acknowledged murder. As of 2006, euthanasia is the most dynamic range of exploration in contemporary bioethics.
People may ask “Why is it the right thing to do?” In order for people to have an answer to that question they must first know what Euthanasia is and how that if you have the mind set of all life is precious like Kant’s exert in the article of euthanasia chapter three of contemporary moral issues you are being selfish. According to Dictionary.com the definition of Euthanasia is “mercy killing. the act of putting to death painlessly or