The unending big and profound agitations as well as depressions in the world today, caused by both old and new social disconcerting maladies, bringing about hopelessness if not bitterness among people – irrespective of race, color and creed – all these are some modern-day phenomena that make a big number of individuals think negatively and thus sadly come up with their likewise markedly negative value systems. No. There is no aspiration for a life in “Cloud 9” but neither is there a realistic hope of the reign of peace and the regime of justice. So it is that every now and then, there come to fore questionable ideas, pursuant errant desires and designs.
Human and civil rights one after another attributed to these and those individuals are thought off, formally listed down and officially affirmed. Different countries have and subscribe to different Bills of Rights with different natures and classifications, implications and consequences. Even the United Nations have their well-drawn – compound and complex – Universal Bill of Rights or something the like. What is interesting, if not in fact perplexing, is that up to these times, there seems to be no Bill of Obligations that is duly drawn and accordingly promulgated. So it is that there are public rallies held here and there, one after another, claiming, defending, and promoting rights. But one has still to see any rally at all, at any time and in any place for the recognition, acceptance and fulfilment of obligations.
And so it is that quite recently, the matter of the “Right to Die” came to fore with proper explanation and justification. it is something that is seen as the pairing of the “Right to Live”. The arguments can thus be summed: If someone has a right to life, it follows that the same must also have the right to death. Just as living is a choice, so too is dying an option. There are times when life is so hard to keep but so liberating to do away with. Thus it is that both living and dying are considered as a matter of the ultimate free and deliberate decision of the person concerned. How does one answer all these?
Whereas no one gives life to himself, the same as well has no right to take it away. So it is that as no one owns his life, the same neither has the right to get rid of it – which is suicide. Furthermore, suicide – the taking of one’s life be this direct or indirect i.e., be this by oneself (Direct Suicide) or through the assistance of someone else (Assisted Suicide) – is intrinsically evil because it is doing away with something that is intrinsically good, i.e., life. Lastly, it is not true that death ends everything. Yes, everything here and now but what about hereafter and beyond?
What is understandable and allowable is the following: When someone for whatever cause or reason loses his health and strength, he clinically becomes dead in the sense that the same is living but a vegetable life, those standing in his name are ethically and morally allowed to have the extraordinary means injected, appended to and/or inserted in the individual concerned accordingly removed in order to allow him to die with dignity – his eventual natural death thus being medically certain after all. There is nothing here about the “Right to Die” but the blessing to die with dignity and in peace.