|
|
Back to UserFriendly Strip Comments Index
|
Today is ... | by dopeinkmarquis | 2002-07-23 04:58:43 |
| I believe the term is |
by slayer |
2002-07-23 05:19:56 |
paper or thesis.
The first thing one must realize is that the whole concept of a slippery slope is a logical fallacy. Therefore, if the only argument against something is the slippery slope, then there is no logical argument against it.
To use this with euthenasia, I would present the following example:
Opponent: Today we will kill people because they are in extreme pain, have less than six months to live, and want to die because every moment of life is unbearable. What's to keep us from deciding that they don't have to want to die? A year down the road, we might decide that the doctor or family has the right to decide. Or what's to keep us from saying you don't have to be on your deathbed, you just have to be in pain. This will lead to other people deciding when you die and the legalization of suicide.
The problem with this logic is that there is no way to tell what the future will bring. It will be up to future lawmakers to decide whether or not the laws will be slackened, but it is illogical to assume that over time, the rules will be changed to allow more people access, or to force individuals into euthenasia.
I'm not arguing for or against, I'm just pointing out the slippery slope fallacy. |
|
[ Reply ] |
|
|
[Todays Cartoon Discussion]
[News Index]
|
|
