|
af62972
|
Dogs do not have many advantages over people, but one of them is extremely important: euthanasia is not forbidden by law in their case; animals have the right to a merciful death.
|
|
human-rights
death
euthanasia
animals
|
Milan Kundera |
|
8182ede
|
Think of all those ages through which men have had the courage to die, and then remember that we have actually fallen to talking about having the courage to live.
|
|
death
euthanasia
|
G.K. Chesterton |
|
7b60235
|
Why [..] should the boundary of sacrosanct life match the boundary of our species?
|
|
applied-ethics
speciesism
euthanasia
|
Peter Singer |
|
04ace4a
|
Voluntary euthanasia occurs only when, to the best of medical knowledge, a person is suffering from an incurable and painful or extremely distressing condition. In these circumstances one cannot say that to choose to die quickly is obviously irrational.
|
|
euthanasia
utilitarianism
|
Peter Singer |
|
f65b10a
|
It is interesting, in this context, to think again of our earlier argument that membership of the species Homo sapiens does not entitle a being to better treatment than a being at a similar mental level who is a member of a different species. We could also have said - except that it seemed too obvious to need saying - that membership of the species Homo sapiens is not a reason for giving a being worse treatment than a member of a different species. Yet in respect of euthanasia, this needs to be said. If your dog is ill and in pain with no chance of recovery, the humane thing to do is take her to the vet, who will end her suffering swiftly with a lethal injection. To 'allow nature to take its course', withholding treatment while your dog dies slowly and in distress over days, weeks or months, would obviously be wrong. It is only our misplaced respect for the doctrine of the sanctity of human life that prevents us from seeing that what it is obviously wrong to do to a dog, it is equally wrong to do to a human being who has never been able to express a view about such matters.
|
|
euthanasia
utilitarianism
|
Peter Singer |
|
6dd79f2
|
In fact, the Nazis did not have a euthanasia program, in the proper sense of the word. Their so-called euthanasia program was not motivated by concern for the suffering of those killed. If it had been, they would not have kept their operations secret, deceived relatives about the cause of death of those killed, or exempted from the program certain privileged classes, such as veterans of the armed services or relatives of the euthanasia staff. Nazi 'euthanasia' was never voluntary and often was involuntary rather than nonvoluntary. 'Doing away with useless mouths' - a phrase used by those in charge - gives a better idea of the objectives of the program than 'mercy-killing'. Both racial origin and ability to work were among the factors considered in the selection of patients to be killed. It was the Nazi belief in the importance of maintaining a pure Aryan Volk - a quasi-mystical racist concept that was thought of as more important than mere individuals' lives - that made both the so-called euthanasia program and later the entire holocaust possible. Proposals for the legalization of euthanasia, on the other hand, are based on respect for autonomy and the goal of avoiding pointless suffering.
|
|
morality
philosophy
euthanasia
nazi
|
Peter Singer |
|
9613270
|
Sollte die Freiheit zu streben, die uns die Gotter in allen Umstanden des Lebens gelassen haben, sollte diese ein Mensch dem andern verkummern konnen?
|
|
freedom-to-die
euthanasia
|
Gotthold Ephraim Lessing |