Hmmmm… in OD

I’m trying to work something out.

If you own a pet and it gets to the point where they no longer have a good quality of life, you are expected to have them put down.

In fact, it’s considered cruel and inhumane not to.

If however, you are a human in the same position, you can’t be put down, even if that’s what you want.

That’s not just cruel and inhumane but illegal. Put down a human in pain, who has a terminal illness and who’s body and mind is shutting down, it’s murder.

But, in some places, if you have committed a serious enough crime, the state will put you down.

This isn’t murder, as you might expect, but justice.

So, what’s best for dogs and no more than some humans deserve isn’t good enough for those people unfortunate enough to be slowly, painfully dieing.

And these are, by and large, the views held by people who call themselves pro-life.

In fact, they are against abortion because that’s also murder.

The reason they have for this stance is that only God has the right to decide who lives and dies.

Unless you commit a serious crime, in which case God says an eye for an eye.

(We’ll ignore the pesky vengence is mine sayeth the Lord bit).

Or unless you are suffering terminal illness, in which case you should do everything you can to stay alive long after you should have died.

And if you can’t fight for your own life, say because you are in a persistive vegetative state with no hope for recovery, others will go to court on your behalf.

Now, I like to think I’m reasonably intellegent. I’m not Stephen Fry or Einstein or even the Doctor, but I’m not Homer Simpson either.

Bit I cannot for the life of me make out any kind of logic from what I’ve put above.

Anyone help me?

Will