Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: xsmommy
I'd have to agree with you. The bottom line for me, distinct from the pro life or pro choice positions, cutting through all the bs, is this: you wouldn't condemn a dog to die a slow and painful death by starvation. Aside of the fact that you'd be arrested for doing it.

I cannot imagine watching anyone, especially someone you love, die from dehydration and starvation while you watch over the course of one or two weeks. Send those food packages to the starving in third world countries though!

Be honest, cut through the bs and just smother her with a pillow or give her a lethal injection - but that won't happen because it's against the law - apparently achieving euthanasia through starvation isn't.

The responses to this situation would be very different if this were a respirator/ventilator situation.

96 posted on 03/20/2005 7:48:02 AM PST by american colleen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies ]


To: american colleen

the slippery slope is my concern. the rushing headlong into the death culture. Where there is nothing in writing, the presumption MUST be for life. i am fine with living wills etc. Both of my parents went through situations at the end. the bottom line here is that she is not terminal. she is not ILL< she is disabled. permitting the hearsay of another person, in this case, conflicted beyond belief, to determine whether someone lives or dies, is a grave error.


120 posted on 03/20/2005 7:52:18 AM PST by xsmommy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson