Somebody brought up an interesting question related to this. Imagine that you have coronary artery disease and your kidneys are failing, etc, because you just couldn't give up your Quadruple Bypass Burger (below)
and the only thing keeping you alive is a fistful of pills every day. If you decided that you don't want to take all those drugs anymore and you die because of it, are you responsible for your own death? In other words, would it be correct to say that you had committed suicide? Or perhaps you're more at fault for the lifestyle choices that put you in said position.I'll be interested to hear what you guys think.
By the way, if you want to see a truly frightening powerpoint presentation, click here.
Excelsior
You know, I almost think my linked addition at the bottom deserves a post of itself. Seriously, that's a very very scary array of information. I hope everybody watches it. (especially you Karissa, being a nutrition major:)
ReplyDeleteThe problem you present is related to the life boat fallacy.
ReplyDeleteIn real life, there is always an element of the unknown. What if God, (through some miricle) saved the burger eaters life? What if B.E. got deathly ill, barfed himself thin, and fully recovered? You never know. People often try to reduce moral problems to two morally repungent options, when in reality, the options remain unlimited it. What about slowly cutting back on the number of pills?
It's still a good question. The Supreme Court has said that folks have a constitutional right to refuse treatment, but not a constitutional right to assisted suicide. It's only one step removed, but, like many things in life, the means may be as morally important as the ends.
Excellent point. Thank you Paul!
ReplyDelete