Discuss the Moral Considerations Relevant to the Killing of Human Essay

Discuss the Moral Considerations Relevant to the Killing of Human Being - Essay ExampleAccording to those who gibe thispractice, they argue that the foetus is a humanity being or a person from the time of conception. Hence terminating it is the same as killing a humanbeingwhich in itself is notmoral.The foetus acquireshumancharacteristics remarkably early in its keepsuch that by the tenth week, it already has acquired aface, arms,and to a faultfingers and toes.Also, the internal organs and the brain activity can be detected by this time. As every human has the right to spirit, also does the foetus. Every charr has the right to decide what should be happening in her body, but the foetuss right to life always outweighs her right tomakeachoiceas to what happens in her body (Thompson 45). Many people who support abortion havevariouspremises to support their arguments. One is pregnancy due to rape. They argue that this is reason luxuriant to terminate the pregnancy. However, one can not say that those whowere conceivedthrough rape have lessrightto live than others. Pregnancy due to rape results in the conception of ababythat also has the equal right to life just like all the other conventional methods of conception (Thompson 56). Hence Judith wonders what will happen when the mothers lifeis threatenedby the pregnancy, whether it is morally relevant toabortthe pregnancy or not. ... This means that abortion is morally permissible in some situations while in others it is not (Thompson 58). Judiths considerations on themoralityof humankillingare similar to the argument of Dan Brock who argued about themoralityof voluntary, active euthanasia. Provision ofrelievefrom suffering is among the many another(prenominal) ways doctors take care of the patients wellbeing (Brock 30). Yet from a third-person point of view, itis not knownwhether an individual(a)s quality of life is extremely low that itis burdensomefor the individual. Hence anindividualmightregardthe continuat ion of his life to be unbearable because of the severity of his suffering andwanta doctor to end his sufferingimmediatelyby ending his life. This means that an individual acting on his values is morally permissible if his doing so is pursuant(predicate) with permitting others to the same freedom. This ismostlyself-determination and thevalueofequalliberty. Hence an individualschoiceofvoluntary, active euthanasia ismore legitimate with permitting others the same freedom. Therefore, an individualchoiceofvoluntary, active euthanasia and the doctors fulfilment of this request are morally permissible. However, voluntary, active euthanasia involves the deliberate killing of individuals, which is wrong. Hence voluntary, active euthanasia is also wrong. Removing life-sustainingtreatmentalso amounts to deliberate killing of innocent people yet itis thoughtas morally permissible (Brock 32). Thisis only donewhen it isconsistentwith the well-being of the patient and hisselfdetermination. Hence voluntary, active euthanasia is morally permissible when it isconsistentwith the autonomy and the well-being of the patient (Brock 35). According