Justification Of Euthanasi Justifiable Or Justified?

After going through all the evidence, I still believe very strongly that George was justified in killing Lennie. In anyway someone tries to spin it there's always a counter that justifies George still did the right thing. In our lifetime where there are many cruel people we’re obligated to do the right thing no matter the consequence, even if it's hard to do, it's best for

He knew that it was his responsibility to kill Lennie. He killed Lennie because he was responsible for him. George also killed him because he did not want to feel guilty or bad like Candy. George also didn’t want Lennie to have a painful death by the hands of Curley’s gang. He knew that it would be best for him and Lennie for him to do it himself. He wanted Lennie to feel comfortable and he wanted to tell him how he felt. George says “No, Lennie. I ain’t mad. I never been mad an’ I ain’t now. That’s a thing I want you to know”(Steinbeck 106). George did the right

Many people would argue that it’s okay to end your life or someone else’s life, if they do not have the possibility of getting better and are terminally ill. Another reason is that maybe they have a mental illness or are a harm to themselves and others. On the other hand, some people believe that life has value and great worth and that being euthanized takes away that value in having life. There is much argument and debate over whether or not Euthanasia is ever justified. At the end of the day, it’s based on what a person believes is right. Everyone has the right to believe what they want to. However, Euthanasia can never be justified because it makes people believe that life is not worth living if you are terminally ill, deformed, in a coma, have a disability, feel that you are a burden to someone, in unbearable pain or have the right to commit suicide. No matter how bad life gets, people should know that life is always worth living. When someone consents to being euthanized or having someone else be euthanized, they may miss out on memories and life’s joys. There is a lot of pain in life that people have to deal with, but that does not mean that anyone has the right to decide that they or anyone else should die. This also does not give anyone the right to inject drugs into someone in order to kill them peacefully. It doesn’t matter if you are just trying to help

“The crash of the shot rolled up the hills and rolled down again. Lennie jarred and then settled slowly forward to the sand, and he lay without quivering.”( Steinbeck, 106). George made the right decision by killing Lennie because he would have been killed by Curley when he found out that Lennie killed Curley’s wife. George had to kill Lennie because he was stuck in such a position where had no other option. and he even killed Curley’s wife which made George to end up with a harsh decision.

First of all, George shouldn’t of killed Lennie because, Lennie didn’t mean to kill Curley’s wife. Lennie knew that if someone saw Curley’s wife lying on the floor dead they would tell Curley that someone had kill your wife. (If Lennie hadn’t kill Curley’s wife they wouldn’t be looking for him, Lennie would still be alive, and have a job, roof, and he would still be with George.) Lennie didn’t want to die, and Curley wanted Lennie to suffer a slow and painful death.

After Lennie killed Curley’s wife George said to Candy “Maybe they’ll look ‘im up an’ be nice to ‘im” (Steinbeck 94). There are other things to do to Lennie. George should have just let the cops find him and lock him up or something. Curley got the guys that work on the ranch to go find Lennie. George said “The poor bastards nuts. Dont shoot ‘im. He didn't know what he was doin’”(Steinbeck 98). George didn't want them to kill Lennie. George tried explaining to Curley that he didn't know what he was doing and that he didn't mean to do that to Curley's wife. It's clear that George killing Lennie was not right to do even though George thought it was right to keep his promise to Lennie's aunt. It's not right to kill

Right or Wrong Is killing the closest person you have ever acceptable? George kills his best friend in mercy. This seems justifiable because he saved him from a worse outcomes that could have happened if Lennie would have been saved. In the novel, of mice and men, you meet two characters who are both very interesting. The first one is george, he is a short average man, him and his slow friend work as migrant workers.

No one should ever be kill for “their own good”. Don’t people have a heart. I mean are people that heartless. No one should be killed even if people think they should. No one should if they’re old animals, mean animals, naughty pets, sick human beings etc. There’s many reasons why people shouldn’t be killed. But ain’t nobody got time for listing all of the reasons.

In the case of assisted suicide killing another is a justifiable act. According to the article.“What’s so difficult about the right to die”, “Assisted suicide is not a private decision only, it’s about the worth of people’s lives and whether we think those lives are worth living”(Wente). This evidence is important because it is not someone else’s choice if someone wants to die or if they should die, if they feel as if their life is not worth living, why force them to live if they don’t want to . Another example is “it says that people with ‘grievous and irremediable’ suffering are entitled to assisted death”(Wente). If someone is suffering we shouldn’t make them keep suffering in constant pain.

George is left with the tough decision on whether or not to kill Lennie. He chooses to kill. George does the right thing because Lennie could be kept in prison, beaten or killed, and he has no use. To begin with, Lennie has committed a crime and could very well be kept in prison. For a guy like him, prison is no place to spend.

​I believe there is no moral difference between killing and letting an individual die. Additionally, I feel in certain circumstances killing (active euthanasia) is often permissible than simply letting an individual die (passive euthanasia). However, we must first define what makes an action killing. There are three aspects regarding the action of killing and on what basis an action is considered killing. An action is sought ought to be killing based on an individual’s intentions, the wrongfulness of the action, and the causation of the individual’s death. The conventional doctrine says, “That there is such an important moral difference between the two that, although the latter is sometimes permissible, the former is always forbidden” (Rachel,

If George hadn’t killed Lennie himself, the other guys would have most likely had been more brutal towards Lennie. George keeps Lennie from suffering. In Steinbeck’s book, Curley says, “I’m gonna get him. I’m going for my shotgun. I’ll kill the son-of-a-b****

Killing someone should be allowed. If they are suffering or you are trying to protect you from something happening to you may kill the attacker. You need this type of protection so you can live. Then they can cause no harm to any more people then they have too you.

Is it right to intentionally bring about the death of a person? The vast majority of people would instinctively answer this question “no,” unless it related to an act of war or perhaps self-defense. What if taking the life of the person would benefit that person by ending their suffering? Would it be morally acceptable to end their suffering? Questions like these are debated by those considering the morality of euthanasia, which is a very controversial topics in America. Euthanasia can be defined as “bringing about the death of another person to somehow benefit that person” (Pojman). The term implies that the death is intentional. Because there are several different types of euthanasia, it is difficult to make a blanket statement

Euthanasia, the ‘mercy killing’, has definitely been one of the most difficult ethical dilemmas. Euthanasia is defined “an action or an omission, aimed at and causally implicated in, the death of another for her/his own sake” (Foot, 1997, as cited in Robert, 2004, p. 145). Euthanasia differs from murder, because the action causing the death is for the sake of the person to be killed. Someone might say that the person wanted to die anyway, so why ending his or her lives can be wrong? Is active euthanasia –acting to end the life of another- ever a right moral action? It is not an easy debate whether it is right or wrong to help end someone’s life. Some people might argue that