The role of our conscience is also a reason a follower of a religious ethic would use to support their objection. Firstly, Natural Law is a deontological theory and does not look at the individual needs or situation; it considers the act of euthanasia or ‘the act of killing’ itself. The preservation and protection of life is a primary precept and should absolutely be followed. Euthanasia goes against this. A follower of Natural Law would object to euthanasia, chiefly for this reason.
Catholics believe that life is the most basic gift God has given to us and in return we are to take care of our own health; but in our lives, “we are not morally obligated to use all available medical procedures in every set of circumstances.” (ProCon.org). The Sixth Commandment in the Bible states, “Thou shalt not kill.” Religious believers argue that P.A.S. is in clear defiance of the commandment. Opponents of Physician Assisted Suicide consider the act to be a mortal sin. Devout Catholics and Christians claim that if a person is to take his or her own life, they will suffer eternal damnation.
Killing is a form of active euthanasia whereby a person is deliberately causing death of a patient. As humans, all patients have the right to make moral decisions with regards to their own life. The argument for personal autonomy provides a stance suggesting that if a patient requests to end their life, within reason, they should be allowed to. However, it can be seen that this completely undermines the sanctity of life. Allowing a human life to intentionally be ended disregards the sacredness of human life and has no direct difference to murder despite the intentions to prevent pain.
Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) then decided to develop his idea of Utilitarianism from this quote and apply it to all areas of social activity. Bentham was a hedonist believing that pleasure was the chief ‘good’ and that all aspects of life should maximize pleasure and minimize pain and those that did were the most moral acts. He created the principle of utility which established whether an action was good or bad according to the benefits to the majority amount of people. This is sometimes described as ‘the greatest good for the greatest number’ of people making Bentham’s theory quantitative. Bentham said ‘the principle of utility aims to promote happiness which is the supreme ethical value.’ In determining how to measure different amounts of pleasure and deciding on the right and good thing to do Bentham came up with the Hedonistic Calculus.
Utilitarianism is a consequentialist theory. However like all ethical theories there are strengths and weaknesses of utilitarianism. The strengths of utilitarianism are that it is straightforward and based on the single principle of minimising pain and maximising pleasure and happiness. This system which aims to create a happier life for individuals and groups is attractive to many. As well as this it relates to actions which can be observed in the real world, for example giving to charity which promotes happiness for poor people and is seen to be good where as an act of cruelty is condemned as bad.
He explains that the death penalty is just an act of torture and is too horrible to be used by our civilized society, stating that it is “torture until death” (220). He goes on to argue that the death penalty is unjust in its practice because it is applied in arbitrary and also in discriminatory ways. Quoting, “Remain grants that the death penalty is a just punishment for some murderers, but he thinks that justice does not require the death penalty for murderers” (221). He goes on to say that life imprisonment can be an alternative decision that stratifies the requirements of the justice
He saw that an action had to cause the greatest or purist happiness. Therefore in the situation of war, Mill would think what would cause the best amount of happiness for people. The general rules that he would follow is: what would be the consequences of war? Would everyone be happy with this? Who would have the most happiness (qualitative).
In both stories the people of the towns are alright with sacrificing one so that everyone else can be happy. We as moral human beings know that this is wrong, but that is exactly a Utilitarian, whatever brings the most overall happiness even if that means sacrificing an innocent. Both stories represent the Utilitarian theme in their own way and are very powerful moral stories. Works Cited Brandt, Bruce E. “Two additional antecedents for Ursula LeGuin’s ‘The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas’ (essays)” ANQ 16.3 (2003) S/T Literature Resource Center. Web.
Anyone, the socially unproductive, the socially unwanted, will be considered useless; will kill off our own species, our morals. It is a way of mocking human life, turning ourselves into God, deciding who is fit to live and die”. Simply speaking, the legalization of assisted death is an act of legitimizing suicide and an inherent consent for killing. In addition there is a huge drawback, which people would start abusing this law and start committing murders
In an industrialized society, particularly one that is consistent with and operates on Judeo-Christian beliefs, it is generally accepted that every individual has the fundamental right to protect himself or herself. When an individual intentionally threatens to violate the fundamental right of someone else’s life or safety, they forfeit