English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

12 answers

That depends on what you mean. If I am dying of an incurable disease, am in intolerable pain, and have no quality of life, then I want to die. It would be pointless and inhumane to make me live a few more weeks or months in that state.

If you mean, should we be able to kill individuals because we don't feel they are worthwhile, then no, we can never do that.

If you are referring to termination, then in my view a fetus that cannot survive unaided outside the womb is not a human being, and has no rights, so yes, the mother can terminate.

2007-03-27 11:49:49 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

"some lives that aren't worth living" makes it a loaded question. The problem is we have limited resources-even with healthcare. Medicare is a big mess, inpart because Medicare pays for anyone, anytime. An 83 year old may be given a $200,000 operation that only extends his life 2 months. I would personally not choose that-it's not fair to have the younger generations pay for it. I would never choose to live like Terry S., even if I were awake. Living unmoving, unable to communicate is no life for me. I wish, if I was in the last stage of terminal cancer or like Terry S., I could just have a shot-pets get it so they don't suffer!

Every dollar spent for extraordinary care takes away from the younger person with curable cancer or the 12 yr old who died from an impacted tooth that spread to his brain. We have hard decisions to make.

2007-03-27 18:55:30 · answer #2 · answered by Middleclassandnotquiet 6 · 1 0

everybody only has one life. while you are using the time you have, even if it seems not to be working well, we all have a purpose. if you dont know what it is, why not try to change the world (for the better of course) =) ??

when your gone, anybody at all, wouldn't they want to be remembered for some great cause? I think every life has a purpose. no I KNOW that! so i guess the answer is that life should be preserved no matter what!

2007-03-27 18:51:55 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

i think everyones life should be preserved no matter what, stealers, murdererd, rapists, people who have mental/physical disabilities, liberals, conservatives, the average joe, men, women, children, even dogs and cats, EVERYONES lives should be preserved. But why? why should we keep all the murderers, all the criminals? As bad as it sounds, they help our society, our morals. For example, a thief robs a store at gunpoint, he gets what he wants and doesnt shoot the lady that he pointed the gun to. This even causes the lady to see life in a different way, she looks at life in a whole new way, she now lives it to the fullest, happy that she is alive today, her new way of thinking inspires her family, the start to see life in a different way, and it becomes a chain of positives from one event. Another example, a murderer who killed a beloved person causes sadness for a family and friends, this makes it to the news, this makes it out to the newest generation and the existing, people improve their morals from this, the new generation see's the sadness of the family and friends and decide that they will never muder a person. they improve their morals. the older generation will see the trauma it caused the family and their friends and will be thankful that theyre still alive. Everyone, all the protagonists and antagonists in society all contributes to our lives, we are shaped by our family, friends, people we love, people we hate, news we see, we get shaped by everyone around us and that is what creates our way of thinking and that is how we improve ourselves. Everyones lives are worth preserving.

2007-03-27 19:03:40 · answer #4 · answered by Al 3 · 1 0

If the foetus will develop into a conjoined, inseparable twins sharing the most basic survival organs such as a head, a stomach etc....

If medical tests prove the baby will only live a shortwhile after birth..

If a criminal is endagering the public and beyond doubt could take the life of innocent people.. then yes

2007-03-27 18:53:43 · answer #5 · answered by Redeemed 5 · 0 0

Only the person involved can decide that issue. In the case of a very young child or an older person who cannot make decisions, it would fall to the appointed relative or, in the case of a child, to the parents to decide.

Life is the ONLY thing we have and should not be surrendered lightly. That is one reason why a "living will" is so important.

2007-03-27 18:48:59 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

I think it comes down to that very perception of value; I.E what someone considers to be the meaning and purpose of life.

Seppuku comes to mind when you ask this question; Here's a quote from a book titled 'The Samurai Way of Death, Samurai: The World of the Warrior' (ch.4), by a Dr. Stephen Turnbull:

"In the world of the warrior, seppuku was a deed of bravery that was admirable in a samurai who knew he was defeated, disgraced, or mortally wounded. It meant that he could end his days with his transgressions wiped away and with his reputation not merely intact but actually enhanced."

In this instance, a samurai who upheld certain values about themselves and believed they could not achieve them in any other other form beyond the ritual of seppuku. They saw the purpose of life in their sense of honor.

Another thing that comes to mind when asked this isn't quite as classy as a samurai, but I think is apt: Zombie movies. In the "Dawn of the Dead" 2004 film remake, characters who whom were infected and would soon become zombies frequently shot themselves in the head or requested others to kill them.

Akin to the samurai, those that valued their humanity or didn't want to hurt others by becoming a zombie menace decided that their lives weren't worth living. They had key personal VALUES towards the meaning and purpose of life that gauged their choices.

And these values aren't universal; Not all samurai perhaps thought seppuku was the only way to redeem themselves. Nor do all characters in zombie films care that they're going to become zombies; They far more prefer to be alive as long as possible, either not caring or not placing VALUE on the consequences of this choice.

PERCEPTION of the situation and core VALUES define what lives are or aren't worth living; And these values are quite different depending on the society, group, and even who you are as an individual.

So: Are there universal rules for life and value? Possibly; But in our world the debate for what those are rage on, giving us a broad range of possibilities to choose from. As I think you'll find from this post of yours, you'll get a wide range of quite different answers with quite specific reasons and examples.

2007-03-27 19:03:56 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

lives that are being kept alive artificially should not be preserved. however, all other lives (ex: retarded people and old people) should be preserved. every human life was created by God and serves a unique purpose.

2007-03-27 18:53:02 · answer #8 · answered by Andrew S 2 · 1 0

Lives that are productive are worth preserving. Losers gotta go. Especially those who intentionally hurt others gotta go.

2007-03-27 18:47:34 · answer #9 · answered by RoxanneZG 3 · 0 1

every life is worth living, remember, there is always someone out there that is worst of than you.

hope ive helped

2007-03-27 18:49:40 · answer #10 · answered by basketball_dancediva 2 · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers