Right to Life? Part 2

Does an oak tree have a right to life? Does a weed? 

Does a butterfly have a right to life? Does a mosquito?

Does a healthy, newly-conceived fawn have a right to life? Does a rabid baby rat?

Why do we rarely, if ever, see deformed, injured, or diseased animals living in the wild? Why are they not nursed by their own kind rather than left to die?

Why do we euthanize (actively kill, mercifully put out of their misery) our pets that are seriously deformed, injured, or diseased and call it compassion but condemn it as suicide or murder when we do the same with ourselves or fulfill a loved one's request?

NOTE: I'm asking probing, thought-provoking questions, not advocating for a specific answer.

Is investing huge amounts of time, energy, creative thinking, money, and all manner of resources into examining, testing, and putting pharmaceutical chemicals into the seriously deformed, injured, and diseased a wise investment? If so, for whom?

Who really benefits from all of the examining, testing, and consumption of pharmaceuticals? 

The dying? 

Does prolonging the dying process come from compassion for the dying?

Who benefits from prolonging the dying process?

Is the so-called "right to life" an absolute?

Right to Life?

Since spirit is that which makes alive, abortion, the death penalty, and war are spirit-related issues in my view. They are issues about ending the spiritedness of human beings. 

Some believe in the "sanctity of life" and invoke their belief in debates about abortion, the death penalty, and war. It's odd to me that many who absolutely oppose abortion on the basis of the sanctity of life often favor the death penalty and war.

When I observe animals, including us humans, I see no "sanctity of life." I see life taken regardless of human beliefs about its sanctity. In other words, invoking a belief in the sanctity of life is powerless. It does nothing to prevent killing. Whenever someone invokes "The sanctity of life!" at the same time millions, if not billions, of plants and animals, including humans are killed. Worldwide on average one human is being murdered by another every minute. That's apart from the human killing going on in abortions, executions, and wars.

The question, in my view, is this: Does the killing affirm or deny life?  Show me how the killing affirms, supports, sustains, and furthers life. 

For example, is the plant or animal killed and eaten in order to sustain life? Does the killing protect oneself and/or others from life-threatening harm? If so, then I say kill. Such killing affirms life.

On the other hand, does the killing maintain or extend one's power and dominance over others? Is the killing a prelude to stealing and adding to one's hoard? Is the killing for sport or done out of mindless disregard for life? Does the killing waste life? Is it done out of fear or hatred of those who are different? If so, then the killing denies life.

I say when the killing we do denies life, we forfeit our right to life. Our life then has no sanctity. We deserve to die.