Dear Editor,

I felt I had to respond to James Schmidt’s letter concerning the recent trend in Death with Dignity laws (“Death with dignity?” Jan. 7-13, 2016 Moab Sun News).

I get really annoyed when people assume that everyone else believes as they do. Mr. Schmidt seems to think that everyone believes in life after death and that having Death with Dignity laws will somehow denigrate his beliefs, or that wanting to end your suffering is somehow going against God’s wishes.

Most of these laws are designed to help people that have a terminal illness and are in great pain and suffering. Does Mr. Schmidt have a moral objection to ending the suffering of animals when they are suffering? I’m going to assume not (irony intended). If we as humans deem that an animal may be put to death to end its suffering is humane, why then do we not extend this mercy to humans? If Mr. Schmidt believes in a merciful God, why would he object to ending the suffering of humans?

No one is forced to use these laws, in the same way that no one is forced to drink alcohol just because it’s legal. So Mr. Schmidt, please allow those of us who don’t necessarily believe as you do to enact laws that we believe are designed to allow humans the same dignity and mercy we offer to animals.