On matters of abortion, I have mixed feelings. I get uneasy trying to say that we can draw the line between when an embryo becomes a human life as opposed to when it is not.
From a purely biological and genetic view, an embryo seems to only be a cluster of cells during the very early stages of a pregnancy.
But, for someone who believes in God, the soul, and divine purpose -- that embryo is life right then and there. Even if birth control was employed, but failed in some way.
But also consider the drive for reproduction and how it cause people to make poor choices. Some people are not ready for offspring though they engage in sexual activity. And unfortunately, many people will go to dangerous lengths to terminate a pregnancy.
But for all one's trying to avoid pregnancy, you wonder why people allow such to happen if they didn't really want a child.
So, I understand the complexity of the debate on abortion. This is very difficult to solve.
But, sometimes wanting to preserve life only for the sake of preserving life could be a mistake.
But I'm no longer talking about abortion. Now, I'm talking about euthanasia.
I distinguish euthanasia from suicide only in that one who commits euthanasia is in the painful last stages of a terminal illness or is in a vegetative state. Or, arguably, a person has requested not to be resuscitated should they lose consciousness and the capacity to breath on one's own.
Should the religious beliefs of the living block the free will of people in such circumstances?
Consider the story covered in the following article? When it comes to euthanasia, do we even have a right to be the judge?
Italy Woman Sent to Clinic to Die