Euthanasia is Inhuman
A subject that has been disputed more ever since medical technology
has dramatically improved is Euthanasia. Euthanasia is assisted suicide, or
it could be ending a patience's suffering by letting him die. Medical
technology is advancing so fast euthanasia is not needed to be a practice
in today's society. Moreover, it is inhuman and against the law.
Many people with incurable diseases have thought about euthanasia.
Their families do not want them to go through the pain any longer. One
reason why these families should not consider euthanasia is because medical
technology is advancing at an alarming rate. Diseases can be cured now that
could not have been cured just a few years ago. The way things are going
technology would probably find a cure for the patience's illness in the
near future. Families or individuals thinking about euthanasia should get
all the facts first about the research being done on the particular illness
that has invaded a member of their family. Think twice before making any
serious decisions.
Euthanasia is an inhuman way of taking care of a difficult problem.
Some people might say that it is inhuman to have someone suffer through the
pain of his or her illness. Many of the families have a harder time dealing
with the pain than the actual victim does. The families would like to ease
their own pain along with the victim's pain. It is not inhuman to keep
someone alive as long as humanly possible. If a cure is found, then the
victim could possibly go on to live a long life. It would be inhuman to not
let the victim have the chance to live the rest of his life. A human life
is the most beautiful thing on the face of the earth or anywhere, and
people should be given a chance to experience the beauty as long as
possible.
Some people want to die for one reason or another. These people go
to someone and ask him or her to help them die. Most of the victims of
diseases that would result in them wanting to die are in an unstable
condition and are not fit to make these major decisions. A paper I read off
the internet said "Contrary to the assumptions of many in the public, a
The difficulty with this case is the senseless loss of life involved which moves people to
Title VII under the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was enacted on July 2nd, 1964 as a mitigation strategy to prohibit any form of discrimination on grounds of a person’s religion, sex, color, race or their national origin. The law was originally meant to solve the problem of discrimination witnessed during voter registration. It was also expected to solve discrimination present at workplaces and schools where there was widespread racial discrimination. However, the law has become an even more relevant tool and has seen to it that hiring and firing processes by many companies are adherent to it.
It’s hard for a family to go through this and the terminally ill want to save their families from as much heart break as they can.
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits most of the discrimination and harassment in the workplaces. The provision of the Title VII covers all the state, local government, private employees as well as educational institutions that have at least 15 employees or more. The Act prohibits any discrimination that may be meted against the individuals on the basis of the origin, religion, sex, color, race, and national origin (http://topics.hrhero.com/title-vii-of-the-civil-rights-act-of-1964/).
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 has grown over the past few decades to ensure that employees, as well as employers, are protected against all employment discrimination. It is extremely important that both employers and employees know and understand what the law means and how to handle such acts of discrimination. As more amendments are passed into law, employers need to have clear and concise policies to help fight against discrimination.
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects against employment discrimination based on “race, color, religion, sex, or national origin” (Moran, 2014, p. 164). This helps ensure fair treatment to all workers. To ensure the safety of all workers, Title VII also protects against harassment, which includes quid pro quo harassment, hostile environment harassment, religious harassment, and racial harassment.
US Equal Opportunity Employment Commission. (2012). Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 Retrieved from http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/statistics/enforcement/religion.cfm
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was the catalyst in abolishing the separate but equal policies that had been a mainstay in our society. Though racial discrimination was the initial focal point, its enactment affected every race. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination in housing, education, employment, public accommodations and the receipt of federal funds based on certain discrimination factors such as race, color, national origin, sex, disability, age or religion. Title VII is the employment segment of the Civil Rights Act and is considered one of the most important aspects of legislation that has helped define the employment law practices in this country. Prior to Title VII, an employer could hire and fire an employee for any given reason. Title VII prohibits discrimination in hiring, firing, training, promotion, discipline or other workplace decisions. (Bennett-Alexander-Hartman, Fourth Edition, pp 85) Though it applies to everyone, its enactment was especially significant to women and minorities, who until its passage had limited recourse in harassment based discriminations in the workplace.
Video games are widely popular as a form of entertainment for young children and teenagers in the United States, and many of these games contain forms of violence. Because this causes exposure to such graphic images for many children, there has been a concern that these violent forms of entertainment affect these children. Numerous studies conducted by groups of psychologists have been directed on this particular issue, leading to evidence both for and against this claim. This is an issue which parents should acknowledge, as it greatly impacts their children. Therefore, parents must become aware of the issue of violence in video games and monitor their children’s access to such games because history as well as numerous studies and statistics to have shown that they have negative effects on children, causing desensitization due to the exposure to such intense images.
Physician-assisted suicide is “the voluntary termination of one's own life by administration of a lethal substance with the direct or indirect assistance of a physician. Physician-assisted suicide is the practice of providing a competent patient with a prescription for medication for the patient to use with the primary intention of ending his or her own life.” (medterms.com) Surveys have shown physician-assisted suicide to be gaining more and more support amongst doctors and “up to half of adults believe it should be legal in cases of terminal illnesses.” (Vaugn, Page 597) In a 2000 large survey, Oncologists revealed 22.5% supported the use of physician-assisted suicide for a terminally ill patient with unremitting pain, 6.6% favored active euthanasia in these circumstances, 56.2% had received requests from patients for physician assisted suicide, 38.2% for active euthanasia, 10.8% had performed physician-assisted suicide and 3.7% active euthanasia. (Vaughn, Page 598) Not only have physician-assisted suicide begun gaining more support amongst physicians but also in the public. In a 2007 survey conducted by Ipsos-Public Affairs, results have shown that 48% of the public believe it should be legal or doctors to help terminally ill patients end their own life by giving them a prescription of fatal drugs while 44% believe it should be illegal. (Vaughn, Page 603) In the 2007 Gallup Poll, results show 56% of the public believes when a person has a disease that cannot be cured and is living in severe pain, doctors should be allowed to assist the patient to commit suicide if the patients requests it and 38% believe it should not be allowed and 49% of the public believes that physician-assisted suicide is morally acceptable while 44% beli...
Discrimination laws exist to prevent discrimination based on race, sex, religion, national origin, physical disability, and age by employers. The main discriminatory practices identified today are bias in hiring, promotion, job assignment, termination, compensation, and various types of harassment. The following paragraphs outline the most common anti-discrimination laws today. (allbusiness.com, 2006)
Death is something inevitable which all human beings must have to face today or tomorrow, or some part of their life.There are many people around the world sinking their lives in the darkness of dignity. Each and every day individuals all throughout the U.S. are diagnosed with terminal illness. They are compelled to wait until they die naturally, at the same time their bodies deteriorate by their sickness that will eventually take their lives. Some of the time, this implies living excruciating pain ,and that most states in our nation cannot do anything about it legally. People should have the will to live or die as the death of dignity is one of those acts that promotes this behavior , as a result it should be legalized all over the states,
According to Corley, Reed, Shedd, and Morehead, (2001) “the most important statue eliminating discriminatory employment practices, however, is the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended by the Equal Employment Opportunity Act o 1972 and the Civil Rights Act of 1991.” The appropriation section o...
It must be remembered that criminals are real people too, which have. life and with it, the feeling of pain, fear and the loss of their loved ones and all the other emotions that the rest of us feel. There is no such thing as a humane way of putting someone to death. Every type of execution causes the prisoner physical suffering, some. methods perhaps cause less than others, but be in no doubt that being.
Euthanasia, the intentional and direct killing of a patient by a physician or another party, most commonly done by useful lethal injections. Originally done to compassionately end pain or suffering. Imagine society where people live in constant fear for their lives. They would never live life to the fullest, or know what was coming in their future. Imagine life where hospitals do not treat people to save their lives, but kill people for their illnesses because someone determines whether their lives are worth living or not. Society argues that it is the right choice, but when put in the situation directly, it is much harder. Once a life is gone, it is gone. It is not a little decision to make. Literally a life changing choice. Society should accept people for their disabilities, and not dispose of them because they are too much of an inconvenience; therefore, euthanasia is wrong because a “slippery slope” or a rapid upcoming to even murder may happen, if legalized, each and every life is valuable, and euthanasia is an unnatural death.