The Stanford Daily

News





Comments about "Life and death ethics debated"


<< Back to Life and death ethics debated

1 Comments on this article:

Report as: spam offensive Joseph Tung on 4/17/07 at 10am

Given the fact that some person's are willing to impose their notions of 'rationality' to others when clearly many perspectives are possible (as in the nature/justification/making of laws), and varying interpretations of 'death' or 'incompetence' are possible or even induced, why would anything like the Advance Health Care Directive be beyond suspicion in content, in motives for application and use?




(Comments are meant to provide a constructive way for users to interact online. Please keep discussion civil, and refrain from using profanity, personal attacks, potentially libelous language, or hate speech. The Stanford Daily is not responsible for any content that appears in the comment section of its Web site. The Daily is not responsible for monitoring the board or removing comments that could be in violation of the policy. The editors of the non-profit newspaper support a free exchange of ideas, even if beliefs expressed are controversial, but The Stanford Daily Publishing Corporation claims all rights and sole discretion to delete or not delete any post for any reason at any time. If something is posted in the comment section of the Web site, the expressed view should not be understood as an endorsement by The Daily or any of its agents. All comments must comply with the “Terms and Conditions For Use” as set out in the “About us” section of the Web site, or they may be removed. By posting a comment, you attest that the material is not copyrighted and that you are fully relinquishing all rights of ownership to said content exclusively to The Daily while maintaining full responsibility for what you write.)