"Dr. Death" is .....well.... seriously dead
IMO, this thread ought to be moved into the "political" section. The entire right to life/death issue is very hot, emotionally charged, and ultimately causes each of us to examine our values on the subject of life, if even for a moment. There are some significant inconsistencies in US laws that complicate the matter.
Facts regarding the matter of Dr. Kevorkian:
- He is, indeed, dead.
- He died without assistance, but he did not die prematurely.
- He served 8 years of a 12-25 year sentence for 2nd degree murder.
- Kevorkian was convicted by "a jury of his peers" in a Michigan state court.
- There is no evidence to support the existence of a sky fairy.
Life is one of the most basic rights granted by the US Constitution. Murder is wrong because it ends a life without due process. This is a simplified legal definition, not based on any particular religious tenets. Suicide is regarded as self-inflicted murder, because one person makes the decision to kill themselves and carries it through. This is consistent with the findings of the Michigan court in its case against Dr. Kevorkian.
What makes this a slippery slope is that if a process is established, who makes the decision to allow the suicide to be carried out? What criteria should be used? What about those who offer physical or on-site moral support; are they accessories to a crime?
I understand about alleviating the pain and suffering of a loved one. I lost my mother to Alzheimer's and too many friends and family members to cancer. I had an uncle who survived the Bataan death march and spent the rest of WWII in Japan. He went to his doctor for a check up 15 years ago. The doc told him to get his affairs in order, he had three months to live. Eight years later, he died. In that time, he got to experience becoming a grandfather and seeing the child start kindergarden. He also got to spend many days working in his garden and many nights in bed with his wife. Obviously, he did not choose suicide, but what if he had?
