No, it is contrary to American justice to kill the disabled, even with their consent prior to becoming disabled. Otherwise, we would have to concede one of the following two things:
or
Regarding point number two, if all persons hold equal rights, and we grant the disabled the right to be terminated at their wish, all persons must be allowed that right. Society would have to accept a universal right to suicide.
The point I made earlier was that such a right to suicide cannot exist so long as the right to life is considered unalienable. Unalienable rights cannot be surrendered or transferred. This means, paradoxically, that unalienable rights restrain our freedom, in that they prohibit the surrender of our rights. Following this logic, there can be no right to suicide under the American creed.
So yes, you could go out in the marketplace and hire somebody to kill you, Dr. Kevorkian-style, but realize that such a choice cannot be accepted in American society for everyone else's protection.
You are exaggerating. This is about killing people, it's about refusing med services. The fact is I've done that more than once. I'm obviously not dead as I was told I would be and I'm also not crippled as I was assured I would be. I've also refused it on occasion in my daughter's case. She is fine and never was in danger as the docs claimed. In fact in all docs really had to offer is lifelong crippling injury, by allowing their intervention.
You see in the end all the docs have to offer in these cases considered here is a suspention of life in some unnatural stage of death. Some people don't want to be suspended in the middle of dying. That is the essence of the topic and it does not include killing disabled folks.
Read Father Murphy's testimony." It will give you the proper perspective and the relevant scenario.