Is It Morally Just to Take a Life? End of Life Article from Duke and NIH Bioethicists Has Me Freaked

A new article from Duke University and the National Institute of Health (NIH) in the latest issue of the Journal of Medical Ethics, is quite frankly making me freaked out and feeling extremely uncomfortable about my future health care choices in America. Couple the article (which questions whether or not it is ethical to take a person's life to save another) along with ObamaCare, which is trying to force Catholic hospitals and universities to provide contraceptive and abortion inducing drugs, and it makes me want to wrap myself in the American flag, grab a copy of the Bill of Rights and scream, "THIS IS AMERICA AND MY BODY. HANDS OFF! YOU CANNOT MAKE MY HEALTH CARE DECISIONS!"

Regardless of your views on abortion and whether or not you are Catholic, aren't we turning in the wrong direction in America when Catholics are being forced against their beliefs to assist with abortions and the option to kill off a human so another younger, stronger human can live is being considered as in any way possibly moral?

"Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, a professor of practical ethics from Duke, and Franklin Miller, a senior faculty member in the NIH Department of Bioethics, state in their abstract ”What makes an act of killing morally wrong is not that the act causes loss of life or consciousness but rather that the act causes loss of all remaining abilities.“ They argue that if no abilities remain then the ”dead donor rule,” which is the ethical practice that a person must be declared dead before removing vital organs, should apply to patients whose hearts have stopped and are being removed from a respirator. " - Liz Klimas writing for The Blaze

The problem with that thinking is simply that the patient's heart could begin to beat again. 

"Ultimately their aim is to justify organ donation after cardiac death (DCD). This is a state in which a patient is neurologically damaged and cannot function without a respirator. Within minutes of withdrawing this, the organs are removed. However, the authors state frankly that the patient is not dead at that point because it is possible that the patient’s heart could start beating again." - Michael Cook writing for BioEdge

Forgive me if I am not as high brow as the Duke and NIH bioethicists who raise the question of morality in killing and answer it as being justified if the person is “universally and irreversibly disabled” and has “no abilities to lose”.  Apparently if the Duke and NIH Bioethicists' ideas were to be shared by society,  having a heart attack and going into cardiac arrest would be considered an opening to take the "moral high road" and go ahead and kill me to save another life.  

This feels wrong.  Am I alone in this thinking?  Please tell me I'm not.

P.S.- Have you heard about The Green PolkaDot Box! Recently launched with over 12,000 members and backed by the Organic Consumer's Association, you can easily buy NonGMO organics at wholesale pricing online. It's like a Sam's club but focused on products for green, healthy living!! You can even shop by dietary restrictions like gluten free, vegan or diabetic.

Sources: BioEdge, The Blaze, Stephen Frank's California, Find Law, Research in end-of-life set... [J Pain Palliat Care Pharmacother. 2010] - PubMed - NCBI
Photo Source: BioEdge