ipl-logo

Slippery Slope Argument Against Euthanasia

1038 Words5 Pages

The Slippery Slope argument also suggests if euthanasia is legalised then it will not just be to those with a terminal illness. It will gradually include more and more people into the category for those who euthanasia is acceptable for: such as it may start to include people with emotional suffering or common disabilities. Also going down the road of the slippery slope argument people believe euthanasia will stop people looking into palliative care treatments and stop people from looking for cures to terminal illnesses.
Most Christians would argue that we should not legalise euthanasia they do not think it is right. When I interviewed students from Wheaton High School (Chicago) they said they disagree with euthanasia because we would be ruining God’s plan. Christians believe that God is the giver and taker of life. Therefore we shouldn't …show more content…

Therefore, they disagree with euthanasia because they think it is part of God’s plan and it allows the sufferer to share Christ's agony. They think Christ will be there to share their suffering. Overall meaning a Christian would not agree with euthanasia being legalised.
A utilitarian would be more likely to support euthanasia being legalised. Utilitarians think that every action should cause the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people as Jeremy Bentham said, “it is the greatest happiness of the greatest number that is the measure of right and wrong.”, and the final result should determine the moral worth of the original action. Therefore if the final result of euthanasia was to increase the happiness of the person and decrease their pain then a consequentialist utilitarian would argue that euthanasia should be legalised because the final result is better for the person. Bentham claimed

Open Document