Euthanasia

Euthanasia must be considered a natural right, such as the right to eat, breathe, love and walk freely on earth. However, society has had to fight hard to be able to exercise the free decision to live or die whenever we want, owing to moral and especially religious prejudices.

Colombia, a country where it is common to die in war, in a confrontation or in the 

emergency waiting room, churches like the catholic qualify as “morally unacceptable” 

that the Ministry of Health, finally, enforce a Judgment of the Constitutional Court so 

that small percent of colombians can benefit from active euthanasia, and it makes 

even less sense that euthanasia, applied under the strictest and most complicated 

conditions as established by the ministry, is described as a legacy of Nazism. 

It is incredible too, that in the 21st century and in a state of law as it claims to

be ours, pulpits and shysters are used to prevent that an elderly person,
rational and free, suffering from a terminal illness or victim of dreadful and
irredeemable sufferings, may have the help of a professional to finish worthily
with his life, if he or she desires. 

Paradoxical, equally, to know that if a rational being has a little animal

 that suffers from an illness that can not be cured, he would be accused of cruelty if he does not 

practice euthanasia; However, if that rational being is the one who suffers from a 

mortal and traumatic condition, endorsed by professional criteria of other rational

 beings, there are those who consider morally condemnable his death by piety. 

Moreover, there are those who struggle with all their anger and public power so that

 these professionals must be treated as murderers. In spite of all this, there are those 

who celebrate the resolution of the Ministry of Health that establishes protocols for 

voluntary euthanasia in Colombia. We consider it a step, even if it is timid and raises

 legal doubts to solve.