An arguement often used against euthanasia is that there are a very small amount of cases... where someone is thought to be fatally ill and recovers, or one does not know that a miracle might happen that then saves the persons life... But who has the right to make the judgement in such a case? Surely its the person who has to live with the condition, and suffer
( ... )
Euthanasia cannot be a clear-cut matter - there are too many variables, too many once-off cases for both sides of the argument.
One thing about your post, though: I know the poor womens disfigurement is meant to force people to think about the hard issues, but that sort of picture CAN be considered offensive. I know, because I've got into trouble for posting that sort of thing before. Just sayin'.
My opinion? Legalise, motherfuckers!! Only after we have the freedom of breathing space of "can-we/can't-we" are we able to have the luxury of "should-we/shouldn't-we".
Comments 4
Reply
I definitely agree with that wholeheartedly.
Reply
One thing about your post, though: I know the poor womens disfigurement is meant to force people to think about the hard issues, but that sort of picture CAN be considered offensive. I know, because I've got into trouble for posting that sort of thing before.
Just sayin'.
My opinion? Legalise, motherfuckers!! Only after we have the freedom of breathing space of "can-we/can't-we" are we able to have the luxury of "should-we/shouldn't-we".
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment