Quote:
Originally Posted by Thor
I keep running into the slippery slope argument, it eerily reminds me of the anti gay marriage arguments, not surprisingly in Iceland the biggest opponents of euthanasia is the religious right.
|
I find this parallel offensive. Euthanasia and gay marriage have nothing at all to do with each other, and to lump them together is to diminish heavily the well-reasoned arguments against euthanasia.
There are no reasons to outlaw gay marriage outside of religious hatred and ignorance.
There are a number of reasons to be wary of euthanasia, all of which have nothing to do with religion.
Euthanasia crucially relies on the goodness of people as one of its safeguards. Unfortunately, while most people are good, many are not. One argument against euthanasia, for example, is doctor-caregiver collusion. The family wants the sick person in question's money, and makes a thinly veiled suggestion to the doctor. Don't think this happens? Think again. Also, many people choose euthanasia themselves because they think they are a burden on their family. Is this a good reason? There are zero safeguards against this.
It's wrong to think, just because you are a good person, that everyone else is a good person. It's not the case. Legislation based around the goodness of people's hearts is destined to fail. The worst part is you will likely never know it fails, since the industry is incredibly hush-hush.
And if you think the slippery slope argument is bunk, then what is the Groningen protocol (neonatal euthanasia)? If not three steps down the slippery slope, then what is it? Look at three of the requirements of regular Dutch euthanasia:
1. the patient's request has to be voluntary - whoops!
2. the patient has to understand his/her situation fully - nope!
3. the patient has to be 12+ - not even close!
It took less than 20 years for these "strict" criteria to be obliterated by the Dutch medical authority. What's coming 20 years from now?