I'm reading Peter Singer's essays on the issue atm. Has anyone else? I agree with all of his conclusions apart from the eligibility of people suffering mental illness for euthanasia. He doesn't think his opinion is worth more than anyone else's on this but I do given that he's a Professor of Ethics who's spent his entire career thinking, debating and writing about these things. I would rather be led by Ethics Professors and doctors on the issue than people who ignore the fact that I'm not in their holy book club. I'd love to put screenshots of certain sections on here but i imagine that's against copyright or tattle rules. He makes the point that when a family refuse to withdraw treatment on religious grounds for a patient with extremely poor prognosis, taxpayers funding this healthcare are not required to fiscally support the religious views of their fellow citizens which is why they are usually, or eventually, overruled by court order.
I know no one on this thread thus far has made religious arguments against AD so I'm preaching to the converted here but those are, and will be, the loudest voices in opposition and it's a mistake to underestimate the influence they still have on policy. They're still power adjacent.
Weirdly, as a mostly fairly lefty on most things, I don't hate Jacob Rees-Mogg as much as I'm supposed to for this very reason. As a staunch Catholic he is personally opposed to abortion. But he knows his is a minority view not shared by most of the British public and he doesn't seek to impose his view or use his political position to change that. I can respect that.
I've gone off-piste here so I'll shut up.
---
Also I hope no one who is religiously opposed to AD feels unwelcome on this thread, feel free to throw in and show your workings with the rest of us.
