Given the above, what options would be morally justified in the Christian worldview for George and why?

The morally justified option would be for George to continue living until God takes away his life. Therefore, euthanasia is not an option for George according to the Christian’s view. According to Christianity, human life is precious and a gift from God and hence taking human life and interfering with the process of God is unacceptable and morally wrong. In addition, Christian views suffering as part and parcel of life and also the plan of God and thus it is morally wrong to interfere with the plan of God (Shelly & Miller, 2009). Therefore, suffering and pain of a terminally ill person should be accepted by Christians just as Christ accepted his suffering on the cross.

My Decision if in George’s Situation?

Even though I am a Christian, if I was in George’s situation and facing the imminent suffering and disability associated with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), I would consider voluntary euthanasia.  Even though voluntary euthanasia is against Christianity, it is difficult to watch individuals suffer as a nurse and personally I would not want to experience such pain and suffering if there is an option of euthanasia (President’s Commission, 1981). Even if it is not morally right to choose euthanasia, the Bible states that God is forgiving and there is no single sin that cannot be forgiven.

Conclusion

Christianity views life as a gift from God and only God has the power to take away life. Suffering is part of life and God’s plan to bring his creation close to Him. A human being should, therefore, accept suffering and similarly, George should accept the suffering that comes with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). Therefore, according to Christianity, it is not morally upright for George to consider voluntary euthanasia.