Attitudes towards voluntary euthanasia may have a great deal to do with religion. Most religious groups are against it, and some are for it. However, almost all have a position regarding it.

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_views_on_euthanasia:

"Religious views on euthanasia are both varied and complicated. While one's view on the matter doesn't necessarily connect directly to their religion, it often impacts a person's opinion. While the influence of religion on one's views toward palliative care do make a difference, they often play a smaller role than one may think. An analysis of the connection between the religion of US adults and their view on euthanasia was done in order to see how they combine. The findings concluded that the religious affiliation one associates with does not necessarily connect with their stance on euthanasia. [27] Research shows that while many belong to a specific religion, they may not always see every aspect as relevant to them.

Some metadata analysis has supported the hypothesis that nurses’ attitudes towards euthanasia and physician assisted suicide are influenced by religion and world view. Attributing more importance to religion also seems to make agreement with euthanasia and physician assisted suicide less likely.[28] A 1995 study of public opinion found that the tendency to see a distinction between active euthanasia and suicide was clearly affected by religious affiliation and education.[29] In Australia, more doctors without formal religious affiliation were sympathetic to active voluntary euthanasia, and acknowledged that they had practised it, than were doctors who gave any religious affiliation. Of those identifying with a religion, those who reported a Protestant affiliation were intermediate in their attitudes and practices between the agnostic/atheist and the Catholic groups. Catholics recorded attitudes most opposed, but even so, 18 per cent of Catholic medical respondents who had been so requested, recorded that they had taken active steps to bring about the death of patients.[30]"

Dear David F.,

Thank You for the article from Wikipedia.

It makes sense that many religions are generally
opposed to euthanasia due to their belief that life
belongs to God and therefore it's His to take and
not the individual's. Therefore many religions are
against euthanasia. Some are not. Others - depend on
the circumstances. However this does not mean that all
followers will follow their religions blindly. Within
religions there are people who follow their own
conscience.

Buddhists are critical of the procedure and the
destruction of human life. Hinduism teaches that by
helping to end a painful life a person is performing
a good deed. Even in Christianity there are groups
of people in a number of countries - with different
opinions. I guess we react differently depending
on our own personal circumstances and how they affect
us and our lives as well as those of our loved ones.

I am anti abortion as a general principle, due to the fact I give rights to the unborn. and in many cases abortions are carried out for reasons of convince, and not for a life threatening medical reason. The unborn has no say in the matter at all. However I do not equate abortion and voluntary euthanasia as being somewhat one and the same. With voluntary euthanasia I believe the terminally ill has the right to choose to end their suffering. it is not a simple matter and it requires a lot of examination before being undertaken. The overriding consideration must always be what is best for the person involved, with the final rational decision to end their life, always clearly being in their hands, and no one else's.

Dear Paul,

Thank you for your input.

However the right to die decision cannot always be
made by the person affected, for example if they
degenerate into a vegetative state. Then somebody
else has to make that decision.

.

Dear Foxy,

.

You wrote :

« I have found that my religion has brought me great comfort in times of crisis … I think that there are still gaps in our understanding that science can never fill … religion is probably here to stay »

You’re absolutely spot on there, Foxy. That’s exactly right. That’s how religion began and that’s how it will continue.

The difference, so far as I, personally, am concerned, is that I managed to “see the light”. It very nearly took me all my life, but I finally did “see the light”.

Though I’m a slow learner and even slower to understand, I have happily been endowed with an unusual propensity for synthetic thought. Where others, perhaps, may only see a series of unrelated images, I somehow succeed in putting the jigsaw puzzle together – despite the fact that there may be many missing pieces.

It does not come easily. In the case in hand, I had to make a serious effort to study and evaluate the intricate mass of historical, anthropological and archaeological evidence to get to the bottom all those difficult questions you raised in your post about “the possibility of some higher power in the universe, some supernatural, transcendental realm that lies beyond the boundaries of ordinary experience”.

I attacked the problem with a critical eye but with an open mind. I won’t bother you with all the boring details and explanations. Suffice it to say that I finally arrived at the conclusion that there is nothing to justify belief in the existence of any such hypothetical entities at the present time.

I found no justification other than the one you mentioned - which you expressed so well :

« I have found that my religion has brought me great comfort in times of crisis … I think that there are still gaps in our understanding that science can never fill … »

Which is why, as you say :

« … religion is probably here to stay ».

.

Dear Banjo Patterson,

Just to add a bit more.

I think that the rituals enacted in any religion
enhance the solidarity of the community as well as
its faith. Things like baptism, bar mitzvah,
weddings, Sabbath services, Christmas mass and
of course funerals. Rituals like these serve to
bring people together, to remind them of their
common group membership, to reaffirm their
traditional values, to maintain prohibitions and
taboos, and as I stated earlier to offer comfort in
times of crisis, and, in general to help transmit the
cultural heritage from one generation to the next.
Probably the origins of religion as the early sociologist
Emile Durkheim claimed - were social not supernatural.
In fact, Durkheim went even further Durheim argued,
shared religious beliefs and the rituals that go with them are
so important that every society needs a religion, or
at least some belief system that serves the same
functions.