Issues in Population and Bioethics | Page 7

can be said to have signed a contract with it. The contract causes the
right of the embryo to demand such sacrifices from his mother to
crystallize. It also creates corresponding duties and obligations of the
mother towards her embryo.
We often find ourselves in a situation where we do not have a given
right against other individuals - but we do possess this very same right
against society. Society owes us what no constituent-individual does.
Thus, we all have a right to sustain our lives, maintain, prolong, or even
improve them at society's expense - no matter how major and
significant the resources required. Public hospitals, state pension
schemes, and police forces may be needed in order to fulfill society's
obligations to prolong, maintain, and improve our lives - but fulfill
them it must.
Still, each one of us can sign a contract with society - implicitly or
explicitly - and abrogate this right. One can volunteer to join the army.
Such an act constitutes a contract in which the individual assumes the
duty or obligation to give up his or her life.
The Right not to be Killed

It is commonly agreed that every person has the right not to be killed
unjustly. Admittedly, what is just and what is unjust is determined by
an ethical calculus or a social contract - both constantly in flux.
Still, even if we assume an Archimedean immutable point of moral
reference - does A's right not to be killed mean that third parties are to
refrain from enforcing the rights of other people against A? What if the
only way to right wrongs committed by A against others - was to kill A?
The moral obligation to right wrongs is about restoring the rights of the
wronged.
If the continued existence of A is predicated on the repeated and
continuous violation of the rights of others - and these other people
object to it - then A must be killed if that is the only way to right the
wrong and re-assert the rights of A's victims.
The Right to have One's Life Saved
There is no such right because there is no moral obligation or duty to
save a life. That people believe otherwise demonstrates the muddle
between the morally commendable, desirable, and decent ("ought",
"should") and the morally obligatory, the result of other people's rights
("must"). In some countries, the obligation to save a life is codified in
the law of the land. But legal rights and obligations do not always
correspond to moral rights and obligations, or give rise to them.
The Right to Save One's Own Life
One has a right to save one's life by exercising self-defense or
otherwise, by taking certain actions or by avoiding them. Judaism - as
well as other religious, moral, and legal systems - accept that one has
the right to kill a pursuer who knowingly and intentionally is bent on
taking one's life. Hunting down Osama bin-Laden in the wilds of
Afghanistan is, therefore, morally acceptable (though not morally
mandatory).
But does one have the right to kill an innocent person who
unknowingly and unintentionally threatens to take one's life? An
embryo sometimes threatens the life of the mother. Does she have a
right to take its life? What about an unwitting carrier of the Ebola virus
- do we have a right to terminate her life? For that matter, do we have a
right to terminate her life even if there is nothing she could have done
about it had she known about her condition?
The Right to Terminate One's Life

There are many ways to terminate one's life: self sacrifice, avoidable
martyrdom, engaging in life risking activities, refusal to prolong one's
life through medical treatment, euthanasia, overdosing and self inflicted
death that is the result of coercion. Like suicide, in all these - bar the
last - a foreknowledge of the risk of death is present coupled with its
acceptance. Does one have a right to take one's life?
The answer is: it depends. Certain cultures and societies encourage
suicide. Both Japanese kamikaze and Jewish martyrs were extolled for
their suicidal actions. Certain professions are knowingly
life-threatening - soldiers, firemen, policemen. Certain industries - like
the manufacture of armaments, cigarettes, and alcohol - boost overall
mortality rates.
In general, suicide is commended when it serves social ends, enhances
the cohesion of the group, upholds its values, multiplies its wealth, or
defends it from external and internal threats. Social structures and
human collectives - empires, countries, firms, bands, institutions - often
commit suicide. This is considered to be a healthy process.
Thus, suicide came to be perceived as a social act. The flip-side of this
perception is that life is communal property. Society has appropriated
the right to foster suicide or