Bubula, Daniel2024-06-032024-06-032013Tarnowskie Studia Teologiczne, 2013, T. 32, cz. 1, s. 17-31.0239-4472http://theo-logos.pl/xmlui/handle/123456789/16453This article bears a polemical character. Apart from the arguments for euthanasia, the reader will have an opportunity to get acquainted also with the arguments against considering euthanasia as morally justified. The ethical debate on the problem euthanasia should exhibit characteristics of a controversy over arguments. However, rejection of euthanasia does not mean undertaking all the possible efforts that aim at prolonging human life. There are situations in which a doctor must take a dramatic decision not to start a therapy or decision to abandon it, limiting his intervention to alleviating the patient’s pain.plAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Polandhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/pl/eutanazjaprawo do śmiercieutanazja biernaeutanazja czynnarodzaje eutanazjipojęcie eutanazjaargumentacja antropologicznaautonomia człowiekanienaruszalność ludzkiego życiażycie ludzkiedobrowolność decyzjirównia pochyłaargumentacja religijnaopinia społecznaśmierćeuthanasiaright to dieright to deathpassive euthanasiaactive euthanasiatypes of euthanasiaconcept of euthanasiaanthropological argumentationantropologiaanthropologyhuman autonomyinviolability of human lifehuman lifevoluntariness of decisionslippery slopereligious argumentationargumentacjaargumentationpublic opiniondeathfilozofiaphilosophyNie zabijajyou shall not killArticle