Henry Imler April 26th, 2006
A while back Dave made a pretty good chart showing the pro-life stance of three parties. I agree with most of his assessments of what stance is pro-life, excepting a couple therefrom. They were euthanasia, war, and poverty.
I want to use two of these areas to highlight what I consider pro-life.
What do I consider the guiding principle behind being pro-life? I can tell you what it is not. Pro-life is not simply being against death in any form or context. People die. It is a natural aspect of the human condition. I do not look upon old age as an evil, even though it brings one close to death.
Instead, it is the freedom to choose that makes our lives valuable. It is why slavery is evil. It is why totalitarism is evil. Freedom is why we shudder when we place ourselves in Kira Argounova’s or Winston Smith’s shoes. When I apply this concept of freedom giving life its value to the common pro-life issues I am forced two conclusions; 1) abortion is morally impermissible and 2) euthanasia is morally permissible. The killing of an infant takes away all possible choices that person could every have. Euthanasia on the other hand is the supreme enactment of choice. It is the choice whether to continue to make choices. Surely to rob a person of that is morally impermissible.
So while an anti-abortion and a pro-euthanasia stance might seem morally inconsistent to some, it is still possible.
- Ethics
- Comments(2)


I am fairly torn on euthanasia. I cannot really find good reasons to support or oppose it without being able to respond to those reasons with just as compelling of a reason on the other side.
I am a bit uneasy with my position, but it is what I am forced to conclude.
I firmly believe in the right to make the wrong choice and in the right to make an immoral choice. It is between the individual and God.