The passage of time influences the content of the law and therefore also the validity of legal arguments. This is true even for charter-arguments, despite the widely held view that constitutional law is made to last. In this paper, I investigate the reason why the sanctity-of life argument against physician assisted suicide lost its validity between the Supreme Court decision in Rodriguez v. British Columbia in 1993 and Carter v. Canada in 2015. I suggest that a rhetorical approach to argument evaluation is the best basis for a satisfying explanation.

中文翻译：

---

论生命神圣论令人费解的死亡

时间的流逝会影响法律的内容，因此也会影响法律论据的有效性。即使对于宪章争论也是如此，尽管人们普遍认为宪法是永恒的。在本文中，我调查了最高法院在 1993 年 Rodriguez 诉不列颠哥伦比亚案和 2015 年 Carter 诉加拿大案之间，反对医生协助自杀的生命神圣性论点失去效力的原因。论证评价是令人满意的解释的最佳基础。