While it is desirable to save both the baby and the mother, sometimes only one can be saved. According to my ethical theory, the woman should die because that is not murder, it is natural causes. It may seem harsh, but God knows when we will live and die, and sometimes a woman is not supposed to live through her pregnancy. If the baby dies, it is murder because the baby had a chance at life, but it was prevented from experiencing life. Life is so important to God that he says anyone who murders should die.
INTRODUCTION “There is a certain right by which we many deprive a man of life, but none by which we may deprive him of death; this is mere cruelty.” - Friedrich Nietzsche Right to die is a upright principle based on the belief that a human being is qualified to commit suicide or to endure volitional control of this right. It is often understood to mean that a person with a hindmost bug should be allowed to commit suicide or assisted suicide or to decline life-prolonging treatment, where a disease would otherwise protract their suffering to an selfsame result. The question of who, if anyone, should be accredit to make these decisions is often central to debate. Hierophant commonly consociate the right to die with the idea that one 's body
The decision is made by another person because the patient is incapable of doing so himself/herself” (2015). Involuntary euthanasia can be regarded as murder (NHS). There are also two procedural classifications of euthanasia which are passive, and active euthanasia. Passive euthanasia is when a doctor prescribes a patient increasing doses of medication which can be toxic. Although, it is the not doctors intentions to harm or kill the patient, this is still the ending product.
Similarly, the same group believes that legalizing euthanasia could lead to abuse and murder. On the contrary, supporters of euthanasia disagree that legalizing assisted suicide in all states would lead to doctors murdering and abusing patients because of the strict guidelines. Several safeguards and precautions are taken when it comes to the practice of euthanasia (Cockeram 7). Mental capability tests are ran to prove that the patient is mentally stable and capable of making the decision themselves (Coster 24). After the tests are inspected by medical professionals to determine the patient rational, the next safe guard is put into action.
Euthanasia, meaning ‘gentle, easy death’, is known as the act of ending somebody’s life painlessly in order to relieve suffering. This is a common topic for debate, with many arguments about whether it is morally wrong to end somebody’s life in the circumstances of extreme illness. People such as Joseph Fletcher, founder of Situation Ethics, may suggest that euthanasia may be the most loving thing in certain situations, and is therefore morally right. However, other people, such as Aquinas, founder of Natural Moral Law, would disagree, stating that it goes against the precept of preserving life, and is therefore morally wrong, no matter the situation. Although there are some situations in which euthanasia could be exploited, my thesis will argue that it is not always morally wrong to end someone’s life in the circumstances in which euthanasia would be contemplated.
Hippocrates looked down on abortion and saw it as immoral to take a life of an unborn. The Pro-life stance see this as a sign that abortion since the ancient times has been looked down and we should stick to this moral value we have that killing regardless of contraception is wrong. The Pro-choice stances sees it that Hippocrates didn’t think abortion was wrong but the technique is what had him worried due to putting danger on the mother. Either stance clearly shows we need to raise awareness on a topic that is
The author states that the scripture mentions about miscarriage but it seems that the Old Testament or New Testament period did not consider abortion as a preferable option, primarily because God commanded the living and human being to have dominion over the Earth. It begs the question when and how humans came to think about abortion? As men and women, respectively, each one understand his or her participation in the reproduction and giving birth to children, I do wonder what made humans think about destroying a life, even though one want to avoid being judgmental in asking if the child is a human? Looking back at the Old Testament, and the first murder committed by a brother, one can compare the cause of killing. It is jealousy and fear of being better than the other.
If a surgeon has operated with bronze lancet on the body of a free man for serious injury, and has caused death, his hands shall be cut off.”Laws 215 and 218 from Personal-Injury Law. This may not seem fair at first, but if you think about it then yes it is. The surgeon knows the risk and he won’t do a bad job for if he does then his hands are cut off. This law also protects the weak from being killed in operation, and the laws are about protecting the weak. Hammurabi’s code I think was in fact just.
If we were to continue allowing hate speech where do we draw the line with hateful actions. In America, as a first world country, people should feel safe with who they are. In the case of the Westboro Baptist church, they protested funeral after funeral of a veteran after veteran(Mears). This caused people morning at the funerals to feel unsafe when they are at their weakest. A consensus along the side of banning speech is that we are to civil to have hate speech.
The decision to or not to donate is a moral decision. There can be no right or wrong answering this. There is a policy known as the Dead donor rule that raises a lot of ethical questions. Medical professionals must weight the value of saving a life with the individual rights with their body. However, with this rule the person must be declared dead before a doctor can harvest the organs.
He argues in his article “Mercy Death Risks Are Far Too Great” that as a patient who is suffering from a disease he feels like euthanasia advocates are telling them that they are lacking dignity and have such a poor quality of life that their life is not worth living. Flippini also argues that he felt objected when he received a letter from his health insurer telling him how much it costs them to maintain his health care. He dreaded receiving that letter because it would only make him feel bad as a person. He says that patients can feel like a burden to their family members if euthanasia was an option. Flippini states that instead of wasting time and effort trying to legalize euthanasia and making ill patients feel like a burden, and that their lives are not worth anything.