• jasory@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Again why is this relevant? This is simply vague posturing.

    You need to show that people have a right to have their wishes fulfilled, that this right extends to dying, and with much more difficulty show that society should place limits on it but cannot prohibit it.

    I would consider the latter to be impossible, because as soon as you permit a third-party to set criteria for the permissibility of an action, there is nothing stopping them from setting unachievable criteria.

    • hakunawazo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I partly agree to your last sentence. But this moral dilemma couldn’t be solved if we see it absolute black or white.

      To stay with the example of abortion: In my country, you need a state-recognized counselling certificate (by approved state or private organizations) for this and must comply with a wait time of three days. I don’t see any impossible hurdles here if you want to achieve this goal and they don’t change the rules by will. Of course, legislation could change this, but that would be another problem.