Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
As applied to the euthanasia debate, the slippery slope argument claims that the acceptance of certain practices, such as physician-assisted suicide or voluntary euthanasia, will invariably lead to the acceptance or practice of concepts which are currently deemed unacceptable, such as non-voluntary or involuntary euthanasia. Thus, it is argued ...
There is much debate on the topic of euthanasia in Judaic theology, ethics, and general opinion (especially in Israel and the United States). Passive euthanasia was declared legal by Israel's highest court under certain conditions and has reached some level of acceptance. Active euthanasia remains illegal; however, the topic is actively under ...
Euthanasia efforts were revived during the 1960s and 1970s, under the right-to-die rubric, physician assisted death in liberal bioethics, and through advance directives and do not resuscitate orders. Several major court cases advanced the legal rights of patients, or their guardians, to withdraw medical support with the expected outcome of death.
The abortion debate is a longstanding and contentious discourse that touches on the moral, legal, medical, and religious aspects of induced abortion. [1] In English-speaking countries, the debate has two major sides, commonly referred to as the "pro-choice" and "pro-life" movements.
Euthanasia may also be acceptable if it is used for selfless motives. On the other hand, by helping to end a life, even one filled with suffering, a person is disturbing the timing of the cycle of death and rebirth. This is a bad thing to do, and those involved in the euthanasia will take on the remaining karma of the patient.
As euthanasia is a health issue, under the Australian constitution this falls to state and territory governments to legislate and manage. Euthanasia was legal within the Northern Territory during parts of 1996–1997 as a result of the territory parliament passing Rights of the Terminally Ill Act 1995.
For example, if involuntary euthanasia of patients with a future filled with intense physical pain is morally acceptable, aborting embryos whose future is filled with intense physical pain will also be morally acceptable. Following this logic, it would not be morally permissible to invoke the fact that some embryo's future would involve such ...
Warren was a professor of philosophy at San Francisco State University for many years. Her essays have sometimes been required readings in academic courses dealing with the abortion debate and they are frequently cited in major publications like Peter Singer's The Moral of the Story: An Anthology of Ethics Through Literature [2] and Bernard Gert's Bioethics: A Systematic Approach. [3]