Ethical Differences Between Infanticide And Euthanasia

Lindsay Largeman
Dr. Adam Neal
Christian Ethics
7 February 2014
Infanticide And Euthanasia As Christians we face many dilemmas each day. One dilemma that is faced more often than it should be is whether or not humans have the right to end a life and who has the right over a child’s death. We view this dilemma as infanticide and euthanasia in which either choice of death can be done in an active or passive way. Infanticide and euthanasia are both unethical behaviors that go against God himself, for he is the only one who may take a life, since he created all life. The background of infanticide and euthanasia comes from some of the same arguments against abortion. Both deal with the same patient and have the same result of death. As stated in Geisler’s text, “if it is unjustified to kill an unborn human because the fetus is not wanted, might be deformed, or might not be able to function fully as a human being, then by the same logic some infants and most of elderly may be eliminated for the same reason” (Geisler 160). The two practices of infanticide and euthanasia are practiced two different ways. One way is passive, which is allowing death with holding natural means of sustaining life. The other practice is active infanticide or euthanasia,
which is purposely causing death. “It is never right either to take a life or withhold ordinary life-sustaining means such as food, water, and air. The only time allowing a death can be justified is when we are withdrawing unnatural lifesaving mechanisms” (Geisler 175). The arguments against infanticide and euthanasia are the same as those against homicide; the infant is an innocent human being. It is morally wrong to kill an innocent person. The first reason for not killing and innocent human being is that humans were made in the image of God, “Who ever sheds the blood of a man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image” (Geisler 164 Gen. 9:6 RSV). The second reason one should not kill an innocent human being that God is sovereign over life. “Only God gave life (Gen. 1:21), and only God has the right to take life (Deut. 32:39; Job 1:21)” (Geisler 164). After viewing both sides of the dilemma, I have made the decision that Euthanasia and infanticide is unethical, and violates God’s sovereignty.
However, I am not against natural euthanasia, which is refusing all medical treatments that aid in a longer life. There will still always be the question of who will make the decision when others cannot. “The Bible says there is wisdom in joint decisions (Num. 35:30; Prov. 24.6)” (Geisler 176). God is able to preform miracles, and he should be sought first on behalf of the sufferer. But if after repeated prayer, medical science is not able to improve a patient’s condition and God does not preform a miracle, then we must rest assured that God’s grace is sufficient (2 Cor.
12:9). In conclusion, in the view of a Christian infanticide and euthanasia are morally unacceptable. Christians must follow God, and pray when dealing with death. Active infanticide is the procedure, which takes the life of an infant. Passive infanticide is the procedure that takes an infants life after the infant has been born. Euthanasia refers to the “good (or happy) death” (Geisler 165). Although these acts of death are very extreme, sometimes we must make a greater good decision, especially when someone is irreversibly dying and it is not against the patients will. However, God should be sought first and repeatedly in prayer for healing before the act of death takes place