Kevorkian has openly stated his intent to make this a clear-cut test case for euthanasia. But far more than euthanasia is going to be on trial. Surely, in a free country, the only moral answer is that a man's life belongs to himself. It is not the property of society or of the government. Entailed in this right to live one's life is the freedom to choose to end it when, in one's judgment, it is no longer worth living.
Freedom means the freedom to choose.
Clearly, choosing death is a serious matter, not to be done on the spur of the moment. But if, after serious reflection, a rational adult concludes that he prefers death, he must have the right to implement that decision. The opponents of medically assisted suicide are plainly arguing from an anti-freedom premise. They are opposed to a man's right to live and to die by his own decision. It says that I am a rightless pawn whom a paternalistic state can compel to suffer as it deems fit.