California Gov. Jerry Brown recently signed California’s own right-to-die law, the “End of Life Option Act,” but that is only a step in the right direction. The right to die should be for all, not just the terminally ill.
The right to end one’s life is irrevocable and universal to all humans whether it be someone ending their suffering, going on to be with a loved one or even as a form of art or protest.
There is not a single human that has ever existed that chose to exist nor will there ever be. By the very nature of reproduction, the human created has no choice in the matter. Existence is a club with unsolicited membership, but society has also made it interminable.
“There is a certain right by which we may deprive a man of life, but none by which we may deprive him of death; this is mere cruelty,” wrote the famous philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche.
Not only is it cruel to deprive someone of the right to die but also philosophically disconnected from the ideals of a free society. Complete self-ownership is inherent of the highest liberties that are afforded by a free society, and stopping someone from taking their life is implying that they are not the sole owner of their person.
There are many arguments against the right to die, namely that any person considering death is mentally ill. Well then the government better build a lot of psychiatric hospitals because every single person has contemplated ending their life at some point or another.
It is natural to ponder or consider such means to ending a situation and simply because an individual has begun to seriously consider that means or attempted it does not make them mentally ill. Some drink away their pain and sorrows, others have sex or drugs as an escape and some choose death.
Another argument against the right to die is that the act is selfish as it leaves friends and family heartbroken and grieving.
Does a police officer stop someone from packing up their bags and leaving friends and family behind forever? No, because, despite the detriment of that action, no one has the right to tell that person they cannot up and leave just because it will cause heartbreak. We cannot apply a certain reasoning to one issue and not another.
The point here is not to advocate for a society where everyone stops his or her cars and considerately waits for someone to jump off the overpass. Rather it is that so long as someone is not encroaching on the rights of another, is a competent adult and acts responsibly that they should be able to do with their body as they please. When you cut it down to its core that is exactly what it is, someone doing what they please with their body.
For those left unsettled by thinking about a world where people were free to take their life, imagine a different reality where adult humans could look at what life on this planet was like and then decide if they wished to be born or not. Does that sound that bad? Not at all. One might even call it fair. So considering that humans have no choice before they are born, then is it not fair to grant that choice to them when they come of a certain maturity?
It is obvious that a considerable amount of legal framework would need to be established to allow people to end their lives in a safe and responsible manner, and there are many “slippery slope” arguments that say it will lead to more of this or less of that. These are not valid excuses or concerns, just laziness and fear. There is no place for complacency or emotion when dealing with issues of human rights, only logic and reason.
Everyone dies. Everyone.