The paradoxes of a sentence that face human dignity with the relative estimation of the worthy

Abstract

The sentence of the Constitutional Court of Colombia that legalized -with certain agreements- active euthanasia adopts a new version of human dignity that no longer is considered as a preexisting reality to the legal system, based and found on its raisan d'etre. Human dignity is now freely estimated by every one: only the holder of the right to life can ever decide when it is desirable and compatible with human dignity. Nobody can be forced to continue living - The Court considers- with the inadmissible argument «of which a majority judges it as imperative or religious or moral» a religious belief or moral attitude that, «under a pluralist system, can only be an option». According to this, the terms are reversed: pluralism is turned into the foundation and the criterion delimiter of human rights. Once again, human dignity vanishes, stepping aside for a relativist position, ruining the justification of any principIe, including pluralism itself.