This piece is a reaction to an article by Dr. Hříbek „Towards Ethics without Theology“. The first part points to certain doubtful arguments and logical inadequacies behind some of Hříbek’s theses. The second part focuses on Hříbek’s key argument in support of euthanasia. An attempt is made to uncover the real logical structure of this argument and to show not only that the conclusion which Hříbek arrives at does not follow from its premisses, but that while preserving the same assumptions one may arrive at precisely the opposite conclusion. The aim of the discussion is to emphasise the necessity of proper and logically correct argumentation in specialist analysis of ethical themes and also to point to the fact that if we wish to find a firm rational basis for ethical disputes we must carefully and consistently consider our initial concepts and theses to ensure that they are generally acceptable.