Euthanasia is ethically wrong and sin before God.

This proposal is an entirely pragmatic one; it says that we should allow euthanasia because it will allow more people to be happy. Such arguments will not convince anyone who believes that euthanasia is wrong in principle.

For this reason, a man's euthanasia is wrong and sin before God.

On this article, I brought forth why euthanasia is wrong and sin against God.

Is Euthanasia Morally Permissible - Sample Essays

However, the love of money and wrong values have twisted hearts of the people, and they haven't the strength to wait, but want to carry out euthanasia.

If people have any wrong decision on euthanasia, ..

The linchpin argument of euthanasia proponents concerns theright to die. They contend that the individual has certain rightsguaranteed under the law and the Constitution that allow themto choose when they can die. These rights are generally arguedfrom the standpoint of autonomy or self-determination, or fromthe constitutional right to privacy. Proponents contend that individualliberty is a fundamental constitutional guarantee, and that theright to privacy protects the right of an individual to chooseto die. Wolhandler (entire article) argues forcefully that theconstitutional right to privacy elucidated in Griswold v. Connecticutand expanded in Roe v. Wade, also applies to euthanasia;thus protecting the individual from the purview of the state ifthat person chooses assisted suicide or active euthanasia. Healso argues that the protection of the right to self determinationis the key to democracy and the social contract on which thisnation is built when he says:

These are some of the reasons that many people in society feel that euthanasia is morally wrong.
Euthanasia is the wrong and sinful decision, because healing can be ahead.

I brought forth why euthanasia is wrong and sin against God

Dutch Penal Code Articles 293 and 294 make both euthanasia and assisted suicide illegal, even today. However, as the result of various court cases, doctors who directly kill patients or help patients kill themselves will not be prosecuted as long as they follow certain guidelines. In addition to the current requirements that physicians report every euthanasia/assisted-suicide death to the local prosecutor and that the patient’s death request must be enduring (carefully considered and requested on more than one occasion), the Rotterdam court in 1981 established the following guidelines:

Many people have beliefs about whether euthanasia is right or wrong, often without being able to define it clearly.

Free euthanasia Essays and Papers - 123HelpMe

One way of examining values and ethics to see if they are worthwhileis through the use of normative ethical theories. By examininga problem or particular policy through the lens of a normativeethical theory, we can determine if the system needs changingor if a particular policy option is an ethical one. There areseveral normative ethical theories that have been proposed byphilosophers. I will examine ethical egoism, utilitarianism, andrights theory; and then use these theories in order to analyzethe problem of euthanasia. This might give us a basis for determiningwhether or not the practice of euthanasia is ethical.

This essay digs into this evolutionary process of voluntary euthanasia evolving into the non-voluntary type.

BBC - Ethics - Euthanasia: Pro-euthanasia arguments

To see this, consider a personwho has been reflecting for some time on the question of whether to goon living, who is not in an emotionally disturbed state, and who decidesto commit suicide, even though such an action is contrary to his or herown interests. A person may very well have the right to commit suicidein cases where it is contrary to his or her own interest. But onthe other hand, it may very well be argued that it is not morally rightto assist such a person to commit suicide - so that allowing the person'sdeath, at his or her own hands, is permissible, but not bringing that person'sdeath about, even when that is what the person wants. Why so? The reason is, first of all, that each person has a prima facie right thatothers not interfere with his or her actions, but does not have a primafacie right that others act in some particular way; and secondly, thatwhile acting contrary to one's own interest is not prima facie wrong, actingcontrary to someone else's interests is. So while it may not be wrongto allow someone else to act contrary to his or her own interests, it wouldbe wrong to assist him or her to do this.