Imagine that there is a law against going to church. Everybody that wants to visit a Christian church or pray in the open is prevented from doing so.
The reason for this is that it is against the general believe of an
atheist majority. The support for this rule rests on the interpretation of a few lines in one of Richard Dawkins' books.
What do you feel right now? Hold on to that feeling and read the next bit.
Some people suffer horribly, they can't take it anymore and there is no or a very small chance to improvement. The pain will only get worse and worse.
This human being longs to die to have peace, life has become hell on earth. Some group of people, using their interpretations of the writings of an ancient tribe, justify to keep this human being from finding peace and force him to suffer much more.
I am not against Christians visiting their churches: nobody suffers from that, so let them be.
But if Christians start to force their values on others and try to prevent their fellow human beings from doing with their lives what they want, I am very, very much against that. You don't have prove enough to force your will upon people, not by a long shot.
If a man is terminally ill and can't stand the pain and suffering any longer, it is of his concern alone.
So my question: would you promote anti-Euthanasia laws, or just something you would never do something yourself and nothing else?
Calendar 
Home
