As focused as I was on this issue earlier this month, I can’t believe I forgot what Saturday was. It is especially ironic given that I spent all day planning a birthday celebration for my best friend while the Schindler family was remembering their daughter’s life and horrific death.
Bobby Schindler has a great article up at lifenews.com reminding us of not only his sister’s death, but the rising trend of “lethal bigotry” in general.
As hideous as it was, the truth is, long before Terri’s case made headlines, the removal of basic care – food and water – was becoming commonplace. It continues to happen every day across our country oftentimes in cases, like Terri’s, where the patient does not suffer from any life-threatening condition.
Much of the problem that exists stems from a blind acceptance of misinformation that has moved us from a firm belief in the sanctity of life to a “quality of life” mindset, which says that some lives are not worth living.
This shift, what I call lethal bigotry, began with the medical community, has infiltrated our judiciary and is taking over our nation.
…
The sad fact is we have become a nation that spends billions trying to find the perfect body, while ignoring the condition of our collective soul; where altruism seems to be a thing of the past, and moral relativism has become a bona fide religion.
Combined with a popular media selling the notion that killing people in certain conditions is an act of compassion, one can understand why people with disabilities are in danger.
The entire article is worth the read. We can’t let this issue fall to the back burner of our minds and hearts.
Sphere: Related Content
This isn’t an attack, but would those who posted that comment about “killing people as an act of compassion” be against capital punishment?
Capital punishment has more than one philosophical basis, other than being paying the just penalty, but also has a probative basis towards the betterment of society being achieved by removing those who are so obviously incapable of functioning within that society.
There are certain conditions where killing a person may be an ethical necessity, or at least a valid hypothesis can be made towards that end. This in fact would be the “certain conditions” where killing is compassionate.
I’m not exactly sure I follow what you are saying. Are you arguing that the pro-euthanasia crowd is hypocritical for being against the death penalty? I would definitely agree with that point.
However, I would strongly disagree with the justification of capital punishment as a means of removing individuals who are considered incapable of functioning within society. First of all, whether or not someone is capable of functioning within society is too relative and not something I feel the government should be deciding. The government should concern itself with punishing individuals who cannot follow the laws and rules of society and removing the threat that those individuals may pose to others, thus justifying the death penalty (in my opinion).
Furthermore, I firmly believe that killing another human being is never compassionate. I advocate the death penalty because it is exactly the opposite of compassion - as mean as that may sound.
Thanks for the post. It gave me something to think about.
While I actually disagree with the taking of another human life under any circumstances. Even those who have take others lives. I find there to be more justification(if such a thing is possible) in taking the life of someone who is a danger to another than in cases such as the Schiavo case where there was no justification. It was death by torture in that case. I think we should be extremely careful when it comes to the taking of anothers life.
Craig Adams
craiga561@comcast.net