Critique of “Life is Sacred; That’s the Easy Part”
... on moral grounds. Dworkin points out that someone of the opposing position could be just as well be using moral grounds to back up the life of mother. The thesis becomes apparent when he uses this example to demonstrate that these people with differing views all share the common main belief that human life, in all its forms, is sacred. It is the basis and nature of this sacred value that forms the disagreement over these issues. This raises the question of whether or not keeping or taking the life is I better respect to the human and their best interests. The intrinsic nature also effects the beliefs of people to presume that the destruction of any human life is wrong. This directly corresponds to his original observation in whether or not the fetus is a human person; whether they would receive this intrinsic passion. In light of how the government must deal with this, Dworkin comes to the conclusion that they shall not protect the rights of either side of the argumentation, and take no position of persuasion on the decisions of the people dealing with these issues. Incorporating this same governmental theory, he reintroduces the issue of euthanasia. He reapplies the shared compassion to the sacredness of human life in the debate between keeping the person alive or allowing their unconscious state come to an end. His final statement returns to a previous notion that all people do believe that human life is sacred, but their freedom of thought will continue the disagreement of how this effects their decisions on how to live and die. At the introduction of Dworkin’s main explanations of abortion and euthanasia he includes factual information on how his claims relate to real life. These incorporate examples of conflicting abortion and euthanasia views in the cases of Dr. David Gunn and Nancy Cruzan. This enabled his future discussions on the common views of the people more reliable since they couldn’t be factually proved. Later his examples of Dr. Timothy Quill and Dr. Nigel Cox served the purpose of supporting Dworkin’s main point that peoples views on the sacredness of life differ based on their personal beliefs and principals. Another positive aspect in which Dworkin included into his article is that he always interpreted the information fairly. Within the debates on both abortion and euthanasia he took the initiative to present the opposi...