"Please, Put Me Out Of My Pain!"
(The Euthanasia Debate)
An Associated Press story
published on November 30,
2004 reported, "A hospital
in the Netherlands - the
first nation to permit euth-
anasia - recently proposed
guidelines for mercy killings
of terminally ill newborns,
and then made a startling
revelation: It has already
begun carrying out such
procedures, which include administering a lethal dose of sedatives." Is your reaction like mine - sheer horror? To think a hospital could be so calloused! Who could give a lethal injection to a precious infant? Yet, for the Netherlands, this is merely a logical extension of a decision made three years earlier when euthanasia became legal.
Generally, the debate in America centers in the relieving of suffering. Euthanasia advocates argue, "We only want to do what is right and merciful. If someone is a victim of intolerable suffering and/or an incurable illness, permitting voluntary death is both loving and humane." That's a powerful argument. Most of us know people who have endured unbearable afflictions. Why force them - or their families - to suffer day after day? What could possibly be wrong with a practice submerged in human compassion? In answering this question, we must look at our topic from both non-biblical and biblical perspectives. By "non-biblical" I mean those reasons which primarily come from good old "common sense."
Non-Biblical Arguments
First, the standard for pain and suffering is not absolute. Some find it difficult to tolerate a broken bone; while others lead "normal" lifestyles under severe debilitating injuries. Who decides when some suffering is too much suffering? Some might say, "The individual must decide. Only he/she knows how much is too much." But, people suffering severe pain do not always think logically. If we leave the standard to the sufferer, then we leave him/her to the relentless desire for immediate relief - a desire which may result in the termination of a potentially productive life. What about the physicians? They are not a reliable guide to a reasonable standard. How often have you heard, "Whatever you do, get a second opinion."? Doctors disagree on the simplest of diagnoses. How could we ever expect them to set a reliable standard for matters of life and death? With no absolute standard comes chaos resulting in bad decisions and the needless taking of human life.
Second, euthanasia results in the devaluing of human life. It's saying, "Only certain kinds of life are worth living. Only certain kinds of people are productive. The person confined to bed, suffering pain can not be as valuable to the family or society. Thus, to take that life is not murder. It is compassionate for the victim and necessary for an evolving society." Again, the question must be asked, at what point does a person cease to make any contribution to himself/herself or those around him/her? When does the suffering and disease create a valueless life? Is there a danger in thinking like Nazi Germany concluding that only blond hair, blue-eyed, healthy human specimens are worthy of life?
Third, there is always the danger of the "slippery slope." The "slippery slope" argument simply recognizes that the "original" generally evolves over the years. In this case, if euthanasia were legalized in America, eventually, it would lead to practices never considered in the original law. Two examples from history are Nazi Germany and, more recently, the Netherlands. Their horrific practices began with compassionate legislation on euthanasia.
Biblical Arguments
First, the Bible places divine value on human life. In Genesis 1 we are told that humankind was created "in the image of God." None of God's creation, except humanity, is so described. It is this dignity of human life that makes its preservation so vital. When Job lost his wealth, his family and his health, his wife encouraged him to, "Curse God and die!" Job refused.(Job 2:9-10) It is this concept of "the image of God" that compels the Christian Church to undertake ministries of compassion. It is the recognition of life's value that demands the Christian to stand against euthanasia.
Second, the Bible teaches it is God's prerogative to give and take life. For any individual to choose to end his/her life, is to usurp the authority belonging only to God. It is the highest form of rebellion. Job, responding to his loss, declared, "The Lord gave and the Lord hath taken away; blessed be the name of the Lord."(Job 1:21) The Apostle Paul instructed the Grecian philosophers, "God that made the world... gives to all life and breath and all things... For in Him we live and move and have our being." The length of my life is determined by God. I have no right to decide to terminate it.(Acts 17:24-28)
Third, the Bible reveals that afflictions are for the good of God's children.(Rom.8:28) In fact, Paul said, "We glory in tribulations also; knowing that tribulation works patience..." (Rom.5:3) Euthanasia is contrary to this basic principle. Euthanasia seeks to relieve the individual of his/her suffering. The Bible says suffering produces growth in the Christian. How we end our lives speaks volumes regarding our basic convictions. It's one thing when I'm young to say, "Trust the Lord." It's quite another thing to actually trust Him when everything looks hopeless to me. How can He be Lord in my life, if He is not Lord in my death? Our most effective testimony is in our faithfulness through afflictions. Therefore, "mercy killing" is not an option for the child of God.
Protecting Life
It doesn't matter how you look at it. Euthanasia is bad for a society; it is sinful for an individual. It devalues human life. It leads to other social ills. We sometimes are confused when we visit an Alzheimer's unit and observe people who seem to have no quality or purpose of life. There are questions we cannot answer. But, we do know that society is healthier when it rigidly guards life. Christians know that God condemns euthanasia. So, in faith we submit to His infinite wisdom knowing that He never makes a mistake.
