From ChatGPT: Rebuttal: Why Forced Euthanasia and “Pressing the Button” Are Ethically Wrong

Violation of Consent Forced euthanasia—whether applied to animals or humans—removes the ability of a sentient being to make a choice about their own life. Consent is fundamental to ethical decision-making; taking life without it treats the individual as an object rather than a subject with inherent value. Even if the goal is to prevent suffering, acting without consent undermines moral agency and disrespects the lived experience of the being involved.

Autonomy Matters Autonomy is the capacity to live in accordance with one’s own values, experiences, and decisions. Eliminating life to prevent suffering ignores the fact that existence is more than the absence of pain. Many beings—human or nonhuman—find meaning, joy, and growth in their lives despite challenges. Denying autonomy for the sake of theoretical suffering treats life as a mere utility, reducing it to a calculation rather than recognizing its intrinsic worth.

The Desire to Live Most sentient beings naturally have a desire to continue living. This desire is itself morally relevant: ending a life forcibly negates the being’s own interest in continued existence. Suffering is a part of life, but it is not the only part; experiences of pleasure, growth, connection, and learning are lost forever when life is terminated prematurely.

Cosmic Extinction Extremes Applying these principles to hypotheticals like “pressing a button” to end all life on Earth amplifies the ethical problem. It is the ultimate violation of consent and autonomy on a universal scale, ignoring the intrinsic value and agency of every sentient being. Even if framed as reducing suffering, global annihilation erases every potential experience, every choice, and every life’s natural trajectory. It is morally untenable and psychologically dangerous to treat life as disposable at that scale.