You don't know that she was dying. And if you believe the word of the man who put her in the condition she was in, you are more deluded than you even have a clue about.
There's a difference between having a actual death prolonged and the condition she was in.
She was not on *life support* but merely had a feeding tube, something not that uncommon. Withdrawing a feeding tube is not shutting off the life support.
She was also reputed to be able to swallow on her own and no serious attempts at physical therapy or rehabilitation were made.
Her husband wanted her dead and he was able to legally kill her and she and her family had no say in it.
Any society that gets to that point is morally bankrupt and people have an obligation to speak out against that kind of treatment of human beings in order to prevent further moral decay.
Amen.
If removing a feeding tube results in death, it is removing life support. Or do you reserve the right to decide logic as well? Like I said, it’s pointless arguing where facts are overruled by supposition and emotion. So I won’t. These decisions are being made every day by someone and we should all take responsibility for ourselves and make our own wished known in a legal and binding way to avoid such burdens and controversy.