And, recognizing that these people have a view that is different from yours, you want to take away their rights and rule their lives for them? Hmmm... what if they feel that you stomping on their right-to-die is an affront to God-given ("endowed by our Creator") rights?
Most people I know in the right-to-die community get upset when euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide are mixed up. You're also twisting the words of the Davidson ethicist--someone I think would have been on your side. I'm kinda confoosed about your stance.
"And, recognizing that these people have a view that is different from yours, you want to take away their rights and rule their lives for them? Hmmm... what if they feel that you stomping on their right-to-die is an affront to God-given ("endowed by our Creator") rights?"
And the problem with this line of thought is the pitfall of moral relativism. I mean, what if the terrorists believe they are freedom fighters?...
How am I twisting anyone's words? Maybe the writer of the article mixed and matched the words "euthanasia" and "doctor assisted suicide", I consider them two separate although related practices.
Right now, this very minute, people can commit suicide. There are guns, ropes, cars, exhaust pipes, various lethal combinations of chemicals and drugs either over the counter or easily obtainable by prescription. Death afficiandos even have books out about how to do-it-yourself.
There are several reasons why the "right to die" movement wants to involve doctors. I can think of a few - to legitimize suicide, which up until now has been considered either a sin or a failure. Second, to avoid responsibility. Doctors are authority figures, and if "Doctor" gave me the pills, it takes away from my own burden of responsibility.
But the most insidious is the social agenda such death dealers ascribe to. Read the stuff they write, and the other causes they espouse. Doctor assisted suicide is the first act, euthanasia is the second.