We read in the Bible that the Canaanites sacrificed their children, as well as ran around naked, and engaged in sodomy. The Canaanites are not accused of euthanizing their elderly. This can mean two things. Either they didn’t euthanize, or the Bible doesn’t have a problem with euthanasia. In the first case we see that these values inevitably lead to a screwed up demography. And not just that. Abortion is far more at odds with the Golden Rule than is euthanasia. If the fetus is not human, if the fetus is a parasite, then the elderly suffering from dementia are doubly so. Abortion is always without consent of the fetus, while euthanasia can be consensual. Everybody agrees that the Golden Rule doesn’t apply to those who break it. Conservatives believe murderers deserve the death penalty. Liberals believe fascists deserve a beating by antifascists. This solves the question how to square the demands of large families (no abortion) with the demand not to attack your neighbours (large families can require wars of aggression). Both people who consider abortion not as bad as euthanasia and people who consider euthanasia a less important right than abortion are highly immoral. They are either cowardly or oversexed (or both). If anyone qualifies for conquest and genocide, it is them.
If the Bible doesn’t have a problem with euthanasia (possible if we see the cases of Abimelech and Samson, supported by the fact that the Old Testament is rather vague about the Afterlife), it is obvious that the Bible agrees with me.
oogenhand 