If euthanasia follows as a logical consequence of abortion, then why not kill those who are deemed to have lost autonomy and functional abilities in order to harvest their organs? Such arguments can be found in a recent article in the Journal of Medical Ethics titled “What Makes Killing Wrong?” by Walter Sinnott-Armstrong and Franklin Miller.
The authors attempt to blur right and wrong by suggesting that if a person has lost functional abilities, therefore, their autonomy, they are no better off living than dead. Thus, they claim, there is no reason why we cannot take their organs first and send them on their way. One of the principle arguments they present is that there is no clear definition of legitimate killing. They even erroneously cite cases where many religions support just wars and killing in justifiable circumstances such as self-defense.
Had they only looked up the definition of killing and murder, they would have limited much of their lengthy discourse. According to Merriam Webster, to kill is to deprive one of life; cause death. To murder is the crime of unlawfully killing a person, especially with malice and aforethought.