Quote:
Originally Posted by smoothmoniker
If we can't agree that a preventable death is a bad thing, then I'm reasonably certain that we have no meaningful common ground from which to discuss anything of importance.
|
You're so certain that your position is the correct one that you're not stopping to think about what I'm saying.
Is every preventable death the absolute right thing under every circumstance? Take a minute to ponder that.
What about a life unnaturally prolonged by life support machines or massive doses of toxic medications? What if the person is braindead? Then you have a QUALITY OF LIFE issue.
There is a trade-off to save that life.
It isn't 100% right all the time; it isn't beyond discussion.
A "preventable death" means one thing to you, but it opens a big can of philosophical worms. Firstly, you can't prevent death. It's a part of life; there's a death for every birth. This is the natural order. You can DELAY death, but by what means? You will always bring about a set of related consequences.
The question is whether the trade-off is worth it, and
you can only answer that question for yourself. You aren't a spokesperson for UNIVERSAL moral constructs.