Ka-pi96 said:
Would you still say that if it were the other way around though? For example doctors trying to save somebody's life. They are still deciding between life and death for another person, and there have even been cases where said person has been begging the doctors to let them die but they've been ignored. |
The doctors aren't really deciding though. They are applying a blanket "life for all" statement to everyone they treat (unless legally prevented from doing so). To say that they are deciding would be to imply that the doctor is looking at a patients chart and saying "Well, he seems like a good person so I'll treat him. The guy in the next bunk seems like a jerk, so I'll not treat him." If that were the case, I would be very much against it and I would believe that it is immoral and unethical.
Because of that, I'd say your comparison is flawed.
