Relative ethics deplorable, perhaps. But nevertheless the case? For example, abortion for any other reason than the mother's life being in danger was until recently considered unethical, immoral, wrong, and punishable by law.
But today, we have "progressed". Many (most?) now think, believe, and feel, that this is not the case. Because of this new ethical position and belief, we are busy re-defining when we can actually call the unborn a person (and therefore it isn't murder based on a larger aspect of our current ethical system), what types of procedures should be allowed etc. Other countries have made "progress" by legalizing assisted suicide. Perhaps canada (and the US) will soon follow suit. But since we still have the "murder" thing hanging around, we will have to carefully decide when someone should be allowed to kill themselves so that they (and the assistant) will not be prosecuted as a murderer. But why should others decide when and what should constitute sufficient grounds for suicide? It may be deplorable, but it looks to me as though that is the case. --Mike --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([email protected])
