Christian Arguments Against Euthanasia

As euthanasia has become a prevalent topic in our society, many opinions have formed regarding the morality of it and whether it goes against Christian beliefs. Two opposing points of view, both written by Christians, explore this topic. John Shelby Spong argues in his article “Euthanasia Does Not Violate Christian Beliefs” that Christians need to reevaluate their view on assisted suicide and that it should be an individual choice. Chris Armstrong argues against euthanasia in the article “Christianity Condemns Voluntary Euthanasia” and contends that as Christians, we should never support the taking of life. While both authors agree that passive euthanasia

Euthanasia is argued to be defined as depriving of life or causing the death of a living being. A primary and controversial component to euthanasia is the idea that the physicians are acting in “God” like form. Christians are thought to believe that “thou shall not kill.” Christians believe that all human beings have been in created in God’s image and should be cherished in all circumstances. However, according to the article written by Ann-Marie Begley, she explains, “if only God can end a life, then clearly all instances of killing are wrong, including killing in war and self defense” (Begley 300). The only way this philosophy can be upheld is with complete pacifism in which most Christians would not agree with. The other argument opposing euthanasia is the concern about the perceived public role of the physician. The metaphorical stance of doctors seen around the country is that they are the ‘enemies of death.’ The fear is that the image would be eroded resulting in the lost of trust within the public. Ann-Marie Begley explains, “the trust does not rest with the cure and healing but with the compassion and a recognition that there comes a time when the healer has reached the limits of his or her ability” (Begley 303). The argument of depriving someone of life is also seen in equivalence to murder. Scholars also differentiate murder from euthanasia in that euthanasia there is no malice

     This essay is dedicated to the expression of the various official views of religious bodies within our nation. Most major denominations are represented. These religions have long been the custodians of the truth, serving to check the erratic and unpredictable tendencies of political, judicial and social bodies which would have Americans killing off their elderly and handicapped.

Euthanasia debates originate all the way from the perspectives and condemnation by Christians in the Roman Empire. The word euthanasia comes “from the Greek words eu, meaning good, and thanatos, meaning death” (McDougall 148). The different types of Euthanasia explain the action taking place such as passive Euthanasia, “to end a person life by not taking the necessary and ordinary action to maintain life”, and active euthanasia, “to end a person 's life by use of drugs, whether by oneself or with the aid of a physician” (Terri Schiavo

Father Frank Pavone states on his article “Brief Reflections on Euthanasia” that “No matter how ill a patient is, we never have a right to put that person to death, we have a duty to care for and preserve life” along with “There are groups in our country pushing for the right to use lethal injections on the seriously ill, or to remove their food and water. We must oppose such moral nonsense with all our strength.” Euthanasia is a fine see-saw and the people who are pro life believe that if we start to allow euthanasia on the ill, eventually it will become an easy way out to just about anyone who is having any sort of hardship in their life. The other topic of argument is the religious aspect of this issue. In “Brief Reflections” it also states that “Our society has created a world in which it is always possible and always considered right to take the easy way out of problems, suffering and death. That way is completely against the example Jesus set for us; it is against Christian values. We, as Christians, must form a counter-culture. We do not pray for an easy, free or painless life and death. Rather we should pray for strength to sustain and understand the life God gave us to live.” People believe that euthanasia is messing with “god’s plan for us” because he “decides” when it is time for us to die. Now, in the case that someone is in intolerable pain, it is our duty to

On the contrary, Conservative have an opposite position. Moreland (1991) suggests that that act of suicide violates many laws that pertain to nature, ethics, and religion. Man’s very nature is to exist; if man begins to want to deliberately take his life, then this violates the natural law of living. Suicide “violates one’s sanctity of life”, in that we have the obligation to protect life and respect oneself. Moreover, these believe connect to the religious idea that we have a duty to use our life in the way God wants. Ultimately, God is the giver of life, and therefore our body is sacred. The reason God allows hardship is because he is allowing a way for individuals to grow in their faith, press forward in despite obstacles, and teach others to do the same. By teaching others, this coincides to the idea that life has a duty to the community.

Throughout the millennia since the origin of man, technology has continuously evolved contributing to a longer life expectancy among humans. Now, even terminally ill patients can be kept alive by medications and machines. These life saving devices also carry the potential to kill a human with little effort or time. The debate has arisen as to whether people have the “right to die” or often referred to dying with their dignity. The modern dictionary defines the right to die as, “a person 's right to refuse extraordinary life-sustaining measures intended to prolong life artificially when the person is deemed by his or her physicians to be terminally or incurably ill”(right-to-die). As the questions circling these methods of killing grow, religious groups are beginning to take stances on the issue. Two of the largest religions in the world, Buddhism and Hinduism, have denounced the idea of death with dignity but for different reasons. While neither religion is a supporter of the right to die, the rejections are not unanimous for either group.

Making policy solutions to problems where morality is the main focus has been getting harder for governments. The public policy dilemma surrounding the right to die is controversial and forces many individuals to question the decisions that governments make. Two groups are affected by the euthanasia legislation: people who voluntarily take their own lives and people who kill an individual who has not made a conscious decision to end their lives (Smith, 2015). The main focus of this paper is to highlight the predicament policy makers go through and examine the roles of governmental institutions who make attempts to settle these policy matters making everyone in the situation content. Throughout this paper, we will go through some important cases that may guide us to better understand the reason as to why policy makers form these decisions.

Euthanasia is a popular debate among our society today. It raises major concerns in terms of morals and ethics. Some may argue that euthanasia is morally wrong, while others think as human beings; we have the right to self-determination and should be able to choose our own fate. Growing up in a Catholic family and being raised as a true believer of God, I think that euthanasia causes an ethical dilemma.

Hindus believes in sacred principle of karma, moksha, and ahimsa. Karma is the result of good and bad deeds in person’s life, and it determines nature of next life or how your life is going to be in future. Gathering or accumulation of bad karma prevents moksha which is the ultimate goal of Hindus. The Hindus also believes in ahimsa it means any act should be non-violent and non-harming. Most Hindus have a view on euthanasia that doctors should not accept any request of the patient for euthanasia since this will cause the soul and body to be parted at unfamiliar time. The result will damage the karma of both doctor and patient. Some other Hindus believes that euthanasia should not be allowed because it breaches the teaching of ahimsa. It interrupts

Those who are against euthanasia may also believe that life is a sacred thing that isn’t ours to take. Many different religions believe this like Christianity, Jewish faith, and some Muslim faiths believe that god is the only one that can take a life. However, in America, we have freedom of religion. Patients who have these religions just won’t take this option. Those who are atheists, or have a religion that don’t believe in this have the option of euthanasia. America is a free country, where people have the choice of what they want to do. The religion of a few shouldn’t determine the life of people who don’t believe in it.

Christians held strict views regarding the sanctity of life and they believed death was controlled by god but it is no longer appropriate due to technological advances and we can keep people alive longer and prolong life (Leone 30) . The holiness of life enhanced, not diminished, by letting people have a say in how they want/choose to die (Torr 40). Many christians relate Euthanasia/Assisted Suicide with Suicide/murder/abortion but it is quite different because there is a difference in prolonging life versus postponing death (Torr 41-42). Some common arguments that christians use are Euthanasia/Assisted Suicide go against christian beliefs because it involves murder/suicide. Another example is life is created by God and should be only taken by God (Torr 33 &

There are many arguments both for and against euthanasia. Many faith groups within Christian, Muslim, Jewish and other religions believe that God gives life and therefore only God should take it away. Suicide would then be considered an interference of God's plan for that individual. Therefore, such groups argue that the patient should continue living and suffering until God decides otherwise. Some religious extremist groups take this idea to the extent that they will not seek medical treatment for any condition at all.

“In their hearts humans plan their course, but the Lord establishes their steps” (Proverbs 16:9, NIV). Humans do this in their hearts, in their minds, in their daily lives, making decisions that seem in the best interest of all involved. However, in the midst of these decisions, and the great debates that exist in regards to abortion and euthanasia, are some omitted from the discussions? Are the fundamental rights of the unborn considered or are they shoved aside for the sake of the well-being of the mother? Is the individual facing end-of life forced into an early death so as not to inconvenience to the caretaker? This reflections that follow will consider the involvement of God in human life from creation and ongoing, how the sovereignty

Moreover, euthanasia is restricted by the church. This is another important point that we should consider, especially for religious people. According to “Death and Dignity” it is emphasized that “Life is a gift from God and it is only God who can take it back”. Christian’s point of view considers euthanasia as a crime against church, religion and God. Christians consider this as an immoral act. When considering the religious factor as well, we can conclude that no one has the right to take control over our lives, especially when we are unconscious.