Legalization of euthanasia contrary to religious morality, in the current society

• Author: Elena Paraschiv
• Position: Faculty of Law and Public Administration, Râmnicu Vâlcea, 'Spiru Haret' University, Râmnicu Vâlcea, Romania
• Pages: 132-136

AGORA International Journal of Juridical Sciences, www.juridicalj ournal.univagora.ro

ISSN 1843-570X, E-ISSN 2067-7677

No. 2 (2012), pp. 132-136

132

LEGALIZATION OF EUTHANASIA CONTRARY TO RELIGIOUS

MORALITY, IN THE CURRENT SOCIETY

E. Paraschiv

Elena Paraschiv

Faculty of Law and Public Administration, Râmnicu Vâlcea,

“Spiru Haret” University, Râmnicu Vâlcea, Romania

*Correspondence: Elena Paraschiv, 30 General Magheru St., Râmnicu Vâlcea, Vâlcea,

Romania

E-mail: e.paraschiv.dvl@spiruharet.ro

Abstract

The research of euthanasia in terms of Christian morality is meant to highlight the

conclusion that no one may decide to terminate life, even when some people are in the

terminal stage of a disease.

In general, euthanasia is punishable by legal rules prescribed by states, but there are

countries that allow such a practice, which is contrary to humanistic principles and spiritual

values protected by religion so that the Church has an important role in educating citizens to

meet all humanistic values and not to intervene on their own initiative in any way in the

progress of life, by suppressing it.

Key-words: euthanasia, morality, religion, risk society, moral values.

Introduction

The illicit or licit nature of euthanasia has sparked controversy since the earliest

times, having as a starting point the statement of Francis Bacon

1

, from 1623, that the mission

of medicine would be not only to restore health, but also to “sweeten” pain and suffering

caused by disease, being able “to obtain for the patient, when there is no hope, a sweet, quiet

death”.

Initially, euthanasia had a passive sense, of abstaining from any treatment that might

prolong the patient’s end unnecessarily, ensuring a peaceful death, without anyone to

contribute to the suppression of life, but in the nineteenth century the sense of active

euthanasia is added, involving suppression of life, by the action of another person, at the

request of the patient, when there is no way to save his life.

The doctrine is also talking about the so-called “voluntary” euthanasia

2

, specific to

certain people who abandoned the elderly or weak or deformed children, in contravention of

basic human rights to life, as well as the so-called “social” euthanasia, an expression used by

the fascist regime in Germany in order to kill 200000 malformed, debilitated or terminally ill

children.

1

F. Bacon, Instauratio Magna, 1 -er part, libr. IV, chap. II, trad. Oeuvres philosophianes par Boillet, M.,

Hachette, Paris, 1834, cited in Encyclopedia Universalis, Corpus 9, Etymologie-Fungi imperfeti, Paris, 1990,

p. 113.

2

Plato, Oeuvres complètes, tome quatrième, La Republique (translation by Baccou, R., Librairie Garnier res,

Paris, 1936, p. 111), stating that “those whose body is badly built, and those who have a perverse heart and

incorrigibly obstinate by nature, will be left to die”.