IS IT PERMISSIBLE FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO EUTHANIZE

Is it permissible for the government to euthanize a portion of a population without consent?



Is it permissible for the government to euthanize a portion of a population without consent?

Introduction

In America today we have nurtured a "culture of death." The hemlock humanity is a major force in our culture, enticing people to take their own inhabits and even providing recommendations as to the best way to consign suicide. Older persons flock to the warm weather of Florida (where LCI is headquartered) so this state is a asking for feeding ground for the wolves of the hemlock society. In a state where much of the community is aging and there is not an abundance of young employees entering the workforce, towns and state authorities concern about the tremendous cost of nurturing for an aging population.

Background

Many of the older community is acrid because they see "the handwriting on the wall." The government and state retirement programs that they assisted to all their working years are now in a shambles and there in no security in retirement. The younger population is furious because they seem they are being taxed to death and will not supply for themselves with the hefty heaviness of taxation. one time government starts to characterise life and humanity, there is no end to the possibilities for personal and selective determination as to who will be allowed to live. At one time, blacks were not identified as human beings. This was the rationale behind the slave trade that brought very dark Africans to the joined States. They were transported in slave boats that held them confined in the identical manner that livestock is confined when shipped to the slaughter houses. (Helen jasper 2006 Pp. 57)

In Nazi Germany, only the Aryan rush was advised human, and we understand the penalties of that thinking. The treatment of Jews and other non-Aryans was alike to that of animals. And the Nazi genetic trials remain a source for horror tales even today. Will a humanity which has presumed the right to kill infants in the womb - because they are unwanted, imperfect, or merely inconvenient - have adversity in presuming the right to murder other human beings, particularly older mature persons who are judged unwanted, deemed imperfect bodily or brain, or considered a likely communal nuisance? The next candidates for arbitrary reclassification as non-persons are the elderly. This will become progressively so as the percentage of the old and weak in relation to the juvenile and strong becomes abnormally large, due to the growing antifamily sentiment, the abortion rate, and medicine's assistance to the elongating of the usual life span. The imbalance will cause many of the young to perceive the vintage as a cramping nuisance in the hedonistic lifestyle they claim as their right. As the demand for affluence extends and the financial crunch gets greater, the amount of compassion that the legislature and the enclosures will have for the vintage does not seem ...