I would argue as an adjunct that every person has an ultimate right to end his or her own life (understanding that doing so may damage others in the process), and that every person may also be reasonably assumed, by their choices of actions, to forfeit their lives within the legal or ethical system of their society.
ie., some acts are so heinous and anti-social that by so choosing to do, a person forfeits his or her own life, and is thereafter a walking dead man, except that his body has not been introduced yet to that state.
Obviously, different societies place different limits on what constitutes so great a crime. In one culture you might be stoned to death for being a female, unmarried, and not a virgin; in another, you might have to go on a multi-state serial murder spree; in others, there may be no offense so egregious as to amount to forfeiture of life.
*I* feel, *if* any life has inherent value, then the one who deliberately removes value another's life (ie legally commits murder) de facto forfeits any value to his or her
( ... )
Comments 18
Reply
Reply
ie., some acts are so heinous and anti-social that by so choosing to do, a person forfeits his or her own life, and is thereafter a walking dead man, except that his body has not been introduced yet to that state.
Obviously, different societies place different limits on what constitutes so great a crime. In one culture you might be stoned to death for being a female, unmarried, and not a virgin; in another, you might have to go on a multi-state serial murder spree; in others, there may be no offense so egregious as to amount to forfeiture of life.
*I* feel, *if* any life has inherent value, then the one who deliberately removes value another's life (ie legally commits murder) de facto forfeits any value to his or her ( ... )
Reply
Leave a comment