I refer to the interview with Louise Vella entitled ‘Not scared to live or die’ (The Sunday Times of Malta, July 31).

Ms Vella argues “If I cannot love life and cannot laugh anymore, just let me be. Aren’t we meant to live a full life and then depart?”

Though it is a fact that all of us would like to live a full life and eliminate, if possible, all suffering, it is not up to us or the State to decide when enough is enough. The principles of a democratic society seem to be based not on what helps preserve the common good and the dignity of the human person but on acceding to the rights and whims of each individual.

Pope John Paul II’s encyclical ‘Evangelium Vitae – on the Value and Inviolability of Human Life’, refers to ethical relativism when discussing such issues as euthanasia. It states: “There are those who consider such relativism an essential condition of democracy, in as much as it alone is held to guarantee tolerance, mutual respect between people and acceptance of the decisions of the majority, whereas moral norms considered to be objective and binding are held to lead to authoritarianism and intolerance.”

Rather than directing the way one should think and reason on issues dealing with the human person, like euthanasia, the State starts adjusting its morals to the whims and wishes of its citizens. In the same encyclical it is affirmed that “the value of democracy stands or falls with the values which it embodies and promotes” and “democracy cannot be idolised to the point of making it a substitute for morality or a panacea for immorality”.

Before giving in to what is termed as the rights of the citizens, it is good for the State and those in power to reflect on the principles of democracy. Let us not fall into the trap of ethical relativism and exalt the freedom of individuals. “When freedom is made absolute in an individualistic way” the encyclical exhorts, “it is emptied of its original content and its very meaning and dignity are contradicted”.

The role of legislators is to safeguard the good of society as a whole and not to appease individuals to the detriment of the common good. Once more the encyclical on The Gospel of Life affirms: “Called to serve the people and the common good (civil leaders) have a duty to make courageous choices in support of life especially through legislative measures. In a democratic system, where laws and decisions are made on the basis of the consensus of the many, the sense of personal responsibility in the consciences of individuals invested with authority may be weakened. But no one can ever renounce this responsibility, especially when he or she has a legislative or a decision-making mandate, which calls that person to answer to God, to his or her own conscience, and to the whole of society for choices which may be contrary to the common good”

For those contemplating euthanasia and all those participating in the debate, it will be of great benefit to go through the encyclical Evangelium Vitae – on the Value and Inviolability of Human Life.