{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03773584905660377, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.407643312101911, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[The quality-of-life doctrine and the sanctity of life].

The term "quality of life" might be used to qualify external circumstances with regard to the life of human beings (A). It also can be used to define the quality of a human life itself (B). Then it replaces the idea of "sanctity of life" by an eugenic idea that can be abused as a notion of discrimination. The B-position implies that life is only an instrument in order to serve a separable purpose (i.e. "the quality of being a person"). This specific quality articulates itself in so-called "indicators of humanhood/personhood". In consequence this "quality" is an eugenic expression including a dangerous power of definition and a selective anthropology that does not seem to be convincing theoretically and that can never serve as the basis of a reasonable and good social life of man.