Is life only valuable when it is not inconveniencing someone else?
If that inconvenience reaches a certain level, then is it proper to end this life, and thus end the inconvenience?
At the end of the day, is not abortion such a thing? Is not an unwelcome baby a tremendous inconvenience to the mother, the family, and society at large?
"Yes", you say, "so let's abort it". "Let us kill the baby that would inconvenience our lives."
Thus it is in America, and much of the world.
But wait! Are there not more inconvenient lives? Are not elderly people with dementia inconvenient? Why yes, they are inconvenient. They are not convenient to their children, their families, and society at large.
"Yes", you say, "so let us abort them too." "Let's kill all the demented people who are a financial drain and inconvenience to our lives."
Is not this slippery slope philosophy coming to a theater near you? Guess what, it is already showing!
Listen to English Philosopher, Baroness Warnock:
“If you’re demented, you’re wasting people’s lives – your family’s lives – and you’re wasting the resources of the National Health Service,” she said.
Dear Baroness Warnock,
You are sounding very much demented to me. You had better hope that society doesn't use my definition of demented, or you might be pushing up daisies quicker than you had hoped.
Hitler lives, does he not?
