The main opposition on euthanasia and assisted suicide comes from religious groups, medical associations and groups concerned with disabilities.
Every Religion has beliefs and policies on the question of Euthanasia and assisted suicide. In the Christian point of view life is a gift given from god. And as long as an individual is not able to create life it is a sin to end the own life. Only god is allowed to take the life “back”. God supports the suffering. Suicide would represent a lack of trust in god’s promise. The Islamic policies are quite similar. The concept of a life not worthy living does not exist in the Islam. The attempt to kill one self is a grave sin following the Islamic policies. Neither suicide nor euthanasia finds support in the Islamic policies. Also the Orthodox Judaism supports laws against physician assisted suicide. Jews believe that the recognition of a constitutionally recognized right to die for the terminally ill is a clear statement against the recognition and sanctity of human life..."1. We see the examined religions do not support euthanasia and assisted suicide at all.
The second opposition is members of the medical associations whose members are dedicated to save and extend life. Euthanasia and assisted suicide would be the exact opposite to their dedication. Furthermore this group is scared that they have to decide whose injuries are too bad to be helped. It might end up with doctors or office workers to decide who is worth the economy costs of a place in hospital. And for them this would not be morally correct.
Being concerned with disabilities the third group opposing euthanasia fears that a legalization of euthanasia is the first step to a society that will kill disabled people against their will. They fear a society similar to the Nazi Germany where euthanasia was used in order to get rid of disabled and terminally ill people. In addition to that those people might get pressured by their families and the society. The family might be unable or unwilling to pay for this person anymore. And the disabled person will feel that and ask for euthanasia or assisted suicide in order to unburden his family.
Promoters of assisted suicide and euthanasia are mainly terminally ill people who live in pain and want to die. They question the right of the state to deny the wish to die of an ill person who is in traceable pain.
Unfortunately both sides are not able to tackle this hot topic directly. In order to alarm the public false scenarios are created. Some groups of the so called “pro life fraction” argue that the debated topic is “physician initiated murder” not “physical assisted suicide”. They argue that a legalization of assisted suicide would permit roving gangs of bureaucrats to visit nursing homes and decide which residents deserve to live and which to die2. They try to create a horror scenario quite similar to old Nazi Germany. The other side tries to argue with the possibility of suicide for everybody. They say illegalization of euthanasia and assisted suicide is discrimination on disabled people. They try to create the scenario of a disabled person who is unable to do anything. The person is not even able to kill oneself. Their goal is it to evoke charity.
The first rhetorical objective I realized used by the pro life fraction is a “slippery slope”3. A “slippery slope” is a rhetorical objective whereby different situations are based on each other but the way they are connected is usually very senseless. Trying to evoke charity the other side’s argumentation is based on imagery. They describe the worst case scenario, a case in which euthanasia or assisted suicide appears right to most of the population. The picture of a man or a woman who is not able to do anything anymore, not even to kill his or herself, could possibly evoke pity in most of the people in this population.
I think it is not possible to state if euthanasia and assisted suicide are ethical right or not. The fact that we do not know what is happening afterwards we are not able to judge if this is worth to die.
1.
2.
3. Structure of a slippery slope: Situation A causes Situation B which causes Situation C which is bad. So we have to prevent situation A in this case the legalization of Euthanasia.
