Posted on 10/17/2003 1:02:10 PM PDT by NYer
Even before the rise of Adolph Hitler's Third Reich, the way for the gruesome Nazi holocaust of human extermination and cruel butchery was being prepared in the 1930 German Weimar Republic through the medical establishment and philosophical elite's adoption of the "quality of life" concept in place of the "sanctity of life." The Nuremberg trials, exposing the horrible Nazi war crimes, revealed that Germany's trend toward atrocity began with their progressive embrace of the Hegelian doctrine of "rational utility," where an individual's worth is in relation to their contribution to the state, rather than determined in light of traditional moral, ethical and religious values.
This gradual transformation of national public opinion, promulgated through media and education, was described in an article written by the British commentator Malcolm Muggeridge, entitled "The Humane Holocaust," and in an article written by former United States Surgeon General, C. Everett Koop, M.D., entitled "The Slide to Auschwitz," both published in The Human Life Review, 1977 and 1980 respectively.
Malcolm Muggeridge stated: "Near at hand, we have been accorded, for those that have eyes to see, an object lesson in what the quest for 'quality of life' without reference to 'sanctity of life' can involve....[namely] the great Nazi holocaust, whose TV presentation has lately been harrowing viewers throughout the Western world. In this televised version, an essential consideration has been left out - namely, that the origins of the holocaust lay, not in Nazi terrorism and anti-Semitism, but in pre-Nazi Weimar Germany's acceptance of euthanasia and mercy-killing as humane and estimable.... It took no more than three decades to transform a war crime into an act of compassion, thereby enabling the victors in the war against Nazi-ism to adopt the very practices for which the Nazis had been solemnly condemned at Nuremberg."1
The transformation followed thus: the concept that the elderly and terminally ill should have the right to die was promoted in books, newspapers, literature and even entertainment films, the most popular of which were entitled Ich klage an (I accuse) and Mentally Ill. One euthanasia movie, based on a novel by a National Socialist doctor, actually won a prize at the world-famous Venice Film Festival! Extreme hardship cases were cited which increasingly convinced the public to morally approve of euthanasia. The medical profession gradually grew accustomed to administering death to patients who, for whatever reasons, felt their low "quality of life" rendered their lives not worth living, or as it was put, liebensunwerten Lebens, (life unworthy of life).2
In an Associated Press release, published in the New York Times, October 10, 1933, entitled "Nazi Plan to Kill Incurables to End Pain; German Religious Groups Oppose Move," it was stated: "The Ministry of Justice, in a detailed memorandum explaining the Nazi aims regarding the German penal code, today announced its intentions to authorize physicians to end the sufferings of the incurable patient. The memorandum...proposed that it shall be possible for physicians to end the tortures of incurable patients, upon request, in the interest of true humanity. This proposed legal recognition of euthanasia - the act of providing a painless and peaceful death - raised a number of fundamental problems of a religious, scientific, and legal nature. The Catholic newspaper Germania hastened to observe: 'The Catholic faith binds the conscience of its followers not to accept this method'...In Lutheran circles, too, life is regarded as something that God alone can take.... Euthanasia... has become a widely discussed word in the Reich.... No life still valuable to the State will be wantonly destroyed."3
Nationalized health care and government involvement in medical care promised to improve the public's "quality of life."4 Unfortunately, the cost of maintaining government medical care was a contributing factor to the growth of the national debt, which reached astronomical proportions. Double and triple digit inflation crippled the economy, resulting in the public demanding that government cut expenses.5
This precipitated the 1939 order to cut federal expenses. The national socialist government decided do remove "useless" expenses from the budget, which included the support and medical costs required to maintain the lives of the retarded, insane, senile, epileptic, psychiatric patients, handicapped, deaf, blind, the non-rehabilitable ill, and those who had been diseased or chronically ill for five years or more. It was labeled an "act of mercy" to "liberate them through death," as they were viewed as having an extremely low "quality of life," as well as being a tax burden on the public.
The public psyche was conditioned for this, as even school math problems compared distorted medical costs incurred by the taxpayer of caring for and rehabilitating the chronically sick, with the cost of loans to newly married couples for new housing units.6
The next whose lives were terminated by the state were the elderly in institutions who had no relatives and no financial resources. These lonely, forsaken individuals were needed by no one and would be missed by no one. Their "quality of life" was considered low by everyone's standards, and they were a tremendous tax burden on the economically distressed state.7
The next to be eliminated were the parasites on the state: the street people, bums, beggars, hopelessly poor, gypsies, prisoners, inmates and convicts. These were socially disturbing individuals incapable of providing for themselves, whose "quality of life" was considered by the public as irreversibly below standard, in addition to the fact that they were a nuisance to society and a seed-bed for crime.8
The liquidation grew to include those who had been unable to work, the socially unproductive, and those living on welfare or government pensions. They drew financial support from the state, but contributed nothing financially back. They were looked upon as "useless eaters," leeches, stealing from those who worked hard to pay the taxes to support them. Their unproductive lives were a burden on the "quality of life" of those who had to pay the taxes.9
The next to be eradicated were the ideologically unwanted, the political enemies of the state, religious extremists, and those "disloyal" individuals considered to be holding the government back from producing a society which would function well and provide everyone a better "quality of life." The moving biography of the imprisoned Dietrich Bonhoffer chronicled the injustices. These individuals also were a source of "human experimental material," allowing military medical research to be carried on with human tissue, thus providing valuable information which promised to improve the nation's health .10
Finally, justifying their actions on the purported theory of evolution, the Nazi's considered the German, or "Aryan," race as "ubermenschen," supermen, being more advanced in the supposed progress of human evolution. This resulted in the twisted conclusion that all other races, and in particular the Jewish race, were less evolved, and needed to be eliminated from the so-called "human gene pool," ensuring that future generations of humans would have a higher "quality of life."11
C. Everett Koop, M.D., stated: "The first step is followed by the second step. You can say that if the first step is moral then whatever follows must be moral. The important thing, however, is this: whether you diagnose the first step as being one worth taking or being one that is precarious rests entirely on what the second step is likely to be.... I am concerned about this because when the first 273,000 German aged, infirm, and retarded were killed in gas chambers there was no outcry from that medical profession either, and it was not far from there to Auschwitz."12
Can this holocaust happen in America? Indeed, it has already begun. The idea of killing a person and calling it "death with dignity" is an oxymoron. The "mercy-killing" movement puts us on the same path as pre-Nazi Germany. The "quality of life" concept, which eventually results in the Hegelian utilitarian attitude of a person's worth being based on their contribution toward perpetuating big government, is in stark contrast to America's founding principles.
This philosophy which lowers the value of human life, shocked attendees at the Governor's Commission on Disability, in Concord, New Hampshire, October 5, 2001, as they heard the absurd comments of Princeton University professor Peter Singer. The Associated Press reported Singer's comments: "I do think that it is sometimes appropriate to kill a human infant," he said, adding that he does not believe a newborn has a right to life until it reaches some minimum level of consciousness. "For me, the relevant question is, what makes it so seriously wrong to take a life?" Singer asked. "Those of you who are not vegetarians are responsible for taking a life every time you eat. Species is no more relevant than race in making these judgments."13
Singer's views, if left unchecked, could easily lead to a repeat of the atrocities of Nazi Germany, if not something worse. Add to that unbridled advances in the technology of cloning, DNA test which reveal physical defects, human embryos killed for the purpose of gathering stem cells to treat Diseases...and a haunting future unfolds before us. President Theodore Roosevelt's warning in 1909 seems appropriate:
"Progress has brought us both unbounded opportunities and unbridled difficulties. Thus, the measure of our civilization will not be that we have done much, but what we have done with that much. I believe that the next half century will determine if we will advance the cause of Christian civilization or revert to the horrors of brutal paganism. The thought of modern industry in the hands of Christian charity is a dream worth dreaming. The thought of industry in the hands of paganism is a nightmare beyond imagining. The choice between the two is upon us."14
In his State of the Union address in 1905, President Theodore Roosevelt stated:
"There are those who believe that a new modernity demands a new morality. What they fail to consider is the harsh reality that there is no such thing as a new morality. There is only one morality. All else is immorality. There is only true Christian ethics over against which stands the whole of paganism. If we are to fulfill our great destiny as a people, then we must return to the old morality, the sole morality.... All these blatant sham reformers, in the name of a new morality, preach the old vice of self-indulgence which rotted out first the moral fiber and then even the external greatness of Greece and Rome."15
In biblical comparison, Jesus showed mercy by healing the sick and giving sanity back to the deranged, but never did he kill them. This attitude is exemplified today by Mother Teresa of Calcutta, whose version of "death with dignity" is to gather the dying from off the street, and show compassion to these rejected and abandoned members of the human race, all the while knowing that they may only survive for another half hour. Her "mercy-living" movement goes to great trouble to house, wash and feed even the most hopeless and derelict, because of inherent respect for the "sanctity of life" of each individual. This attitude is summed up in her statement: "I see Jesus in every human being. I say to myself, this is hungry Jesus, I must feed him. This is sick Jesus. This one has leprosy or gangrene; I must wash him and tend to him. I serve because I love Jesus."16
Will America chose the "sanctity of life" concept, as demonstrated by Mother Teresa, or will America chose the "quality of life" concept, championed by self-proclaimed doctors of death court decisions - such as in the case of Terri Schiavo - and continue its slide toward Auschwitz? What kind of subtle anesthetic has been allowed to deaden our national conscience? What horrors await us? The question is not whether the suffering and dying person's life should be terminated, the question is what kind of nation will we become if they are? Their physical death is preceded only by our moral death!
1 Malcolm Muggeridge, "The Humane Holocaust," The Human Life Review, Winter, 1980. Ronald Reagan, Abortion & The Conscience of the Nation (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, Inc. 1984; The Human Life Foundation, Inc.), pp. 85 - 87.
2 C. Everett Koop, M.D., "The Slide to Auschwitz," The Human Life Review, Spring, 1977; quoting from Leo Alexander, "Medical Science Under Dictatorship," New England Journal of Medicine, July 4, 1949, 241:39 - 47. (C. Everett Koop, M.D., originally delivered as an address to The American Academy of Pediatrics, on the occasion of his receiving the William E. Ladd Medal, the highest honor given to pediatric surgeons in America.) Ronald Reagan, Abortion and The Conscience of the Nation (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, Inc. 1984; The Human Life Foundation, Inc.), pp. 61 - 63. Die Freigabe der Vernichtung liebensunwerten Lebens (Permission to Destroy Life Unworthy of Life) 1920. Adolf Jost, Das Recht auf den Tod (The Right to Death) 1895. Robert Jay Lifton, The Nazi Doctors (N Y: Basic Books, 1986), p. 27.
3 New York Times, October 10, 1933, Associated Press release, "Nazi Plan to Kill Incurables to End Pain; German Religious Groups Oppose Move." Noah H. Hutchings, "Nazi Euthanasia" (Oklahoma City, OK: Bible in the News, published by the Southwest Radio Church, P.O. Box 1144, Oklahoma City, OK 73101, October 1996), Vol. 1996, No. 10, p. 16.
4 Koop, p. 70.
5 Ibid., pp. 61, 70. Muggeridge, p. 90. The World Book Encyclopedia 19 vols. (Chicago, IL: Field Enterprises, Inc., 1957), vol. 7, p. 2975.
6 Koop, pp. 61 - 63; Muggeridge, pp. 86 - 89.
7 Ibid,
8 Ibid, 9 Ibid, 10 Ibid, 11 Ibid,
12 Koop, pp. 67 - 70.
13 Peter Singer. October 5, 2001, comments at the Governor's Commission on Disability, Concord, New Hampshire. Harry R. Weber, Associated Press, Boston Globe,10/5/2001 17:46 "Singer gets respectful reception." http://www.boston.com/dailynews.
14 Roosevelt, Theodore. 1909. Noah Brooks, Men of Achievement - Statesmen (NY: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1904), p. 317. George Grant, Third Time Around (Brentwood, TN: Wolgemuth & Hyatt, Inc., 1991), p. 118. George Grant, The Quick and the Dead (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 1981), p. 134. John Eidsmoe, Columbus & Cortez, Conquerors for Christ (Green Forest, AR: New Leaf Press, 1992), pp. 296-297.
15 Roosevelt, Theodore. 1905, in his State of the Union address. David, L. Johnson, Theodore Roosevelt: American Monarch (Philadelphia: American History Sources, 1981), p. 44. George Grant, Third Time Around (Brentwood, TN: Wolgemuth & Hyatt, Inc., 1991) pp. 118-119.
16 Mother Teresa of Calcutta. Statement. Bless Your Heart (series II) (Eden Prairie, MN: Heartland Sampler, Inc., 1990), 10.15. Muggeridge, pp. 91 - 92.
Other sources include: Fr. Virgil C. Blum, S.J. & Charles J. Sykes, "The Lesson of Euthanasia," The Human Life Review, Spring, 1976. A.J. Dyck, "The Value of Life: Two Contending Policies," Harvard Magazine, Jan., 1970, pp. 30 - 36. Henry Friedlander, The Origins of Nazi Genocide: From Euthanasia to the Final Solution (N.C.: University of North Carolina Press, 1995). Robert Jay Lifton, The Nazi Doctors: Medical Killing & the Psychology of Genocide (Basic Books, 1986). William Brennan, Medical Holocausts: Exterminative Medicine in Nazi Germany and Contemporary America (Norland, 1980). William Brennan, Dehumanizing the Vulnerable: When Word Games Take Lives (Chicago, IL: Loyala University Press, 1995; 3441 N. Ashland Ave. Chicago, IL. 60657). Eleanor Schlafly and John D. Boland, "Word Warfare: Giving Evil a Tolerable Name" (Mindszenty Report, Cardinal Mindszenty Foundation, P.O. Box 11321, St. Louis, Mo. 63105), Apr. 1996, Vol. 38, No. 4. "Protection of Life" series, Sanctity of Life or Quality of Life, Law Reform Commission of Canada. Francis Schaeffer and C. Everett Koop, M.D., What Ever Happened to the Human Race? (1979).
William J. Federer is a nationally known speaker, best-selling author, and president of Amerisearch, Inc., a publishing company dedicated to research America's noble heritage. His AMERICAN MINUTE radio feature is aired across the country recalling events of American significance on the date they occurred. The American Minute is </EM
Levitcus 23:36...............Psalm 75........good night!
Amen,........More Grace and mercy, Mercy, MERCY,.....In Jesus' Precious Name, Amen!!!
"In places like Holland, Switzerland or Oregon in the US, laws already allow assisted suicides, and campaigners say there is a groundswell of public opinion in many other countries - particularly in Europe - which will force their governments to follow suit."
"But the debate is still a controversial one and the recent death of Dublin woman Rosemary Toole Gilhooley, shows the stark cultural gap that exists between places that tolerate the practice, and those to which it is a repellent concept."
"Mr Exoo is said to have attended about 100 suicides in the US, but they all went unnoticed until this one in conservative Ireland, where assisting a suicide is a crime almost as severe as murder - drawing up to 14 years in prison."
So there are countries holding the culture of death at bay, at least for now.
Ireland lets you bring your pets along if you move there and you don't have to put them in isolation for six months.
Ireland has an orthodox church for those of us who desire one.
I am nearly packing now....LOL.
From the Toronto Star article [HERE] : But because she's been in a persistent vegetative coma, she won't be experiencing anything, he explains.” She is not in a persistent vegetative coma or state. Her measured awareness rises above the threshold for those two states on the Glascow scale.
”When someone loses the higher brain function, if the cerebral cortex is gone, "there's no consciousness whatsoever, no sense of self-awareness, no sense of discomfort. They're living on the brain stem, with automatic respiration. If nothing but the brain stem is alive, she can't be aware of anything." But Terri follows commands, so there is a level of awareness. You asserted that Terri has no cerebral cortex functioning now. The wording does not state that such is the case with Terri, and rightly so because the opining physician cannot know one way or the other, not having tested Terri. Sorry, that link proves none of the assertion that Terri no longer has a functioning cerebral cortex.
_________________
From the StPetersburgTimes, Mary Jo Melone article [HERE ]: "I don't think it is widely appreciated just how damaged her brain is," said Walker, an internist, who has followed the case closely by reading the public record. If her factual medical records are not yet public record, what this physician is going on are the videos and things printed by reporters and to be read in depositions. He asserts large claims, but there is no CT scan or brainscan to substantiate his OPINION.
Schiavo's cerebral cortex, he said, is mostly gone. It was destroyed by the loss of oxygen she suffered when she had a heart attack 13 years ago. I’m sorry, but this is an unsubstantiated opinion, not a test verified medical fact. Once gone, the cortex cannot grow back, Walker said. The space it once occupied in Schiavo's skull is now filled with spinal fluid. I would caution any reading that assertion that it was believed Karen Quinlan’s cerebral cortex (she was in a deeper coma state for many years before they turned off her respirator and she continued to breath on her own) was withered and the space filled with spinal fluid, but autopsy proved that to be a false assumption. Sorry, this too is opinion, not medical test verified fact.
_______________
From the BBC News article [HERE]: (A reporter who would post the following without either researching the facts or having the facts but choosing to mischaracterize them is a hard one to believe further on …) Mr Schiavo's lawyer says the money has been spent on medical bills. Yes, it’s been spent, but Judge Greer secretly allowed the raiding of Terri’s rehabilitation trust fund to pay Felos, the attorney. That hardly qualifies as ‘spent for medical bills!’
Mrs Schiavo's brain scans have not been made public but Dr Walker has followed the case closely through media reports and court records.
"The majority of her cerebral cortex - the part of the brain that thinks and feels - has been destroyed and replaced by fluid," he said. This is the same Dr. Walker of the StPeteTimes, Melone article. And again, he has not stated that he has seen the scans, he is merely stating his opinion of what he believes to be the case from following the public records. This article is also not a definitive answer to the state of Terri’s cerebral cortex. Sorry to have to be so negative, but these articles are not sufficient to base an assertion upon.
It is possible that Terri’s cerebral cortex has atrophied with so little stimulation as accomplished by the commands of her 'guardian' adulterous defrauding abusive husband, but none of the material in the three articles can substantiate that her cortex has atrophied. And we ought to look questioningly upon them because there is video indicating Terri is above the response threshold for persistent vegetative state, and according to some physicians who have actually examined her in person. To be fair, the court’s appointed physician who examined Terri in person and is seen in one of the video records, has stated that he believes her responses are reflexive in nature and not indicative of comprehension or awareness. Which brings me to one last point, a point which was addressed by a poster previously (TheOtherOne): paraphrasing, 'when there is a question or disagreement, then we ought err on the side of life.'
I am praying for her!
We don't have ESP about these life-and-death issues, like George Felos does.
Felos is the lawyer for Terri's husband. He felt he could telepathically communicate with another woman (Mrs. Browning) whose death he hoped to arrange. He said she let him know, soul-to-soul, that she wanted release from her body.
He wanted to see Browning for himself. She could not speak, but Felos says his spiritual side picked up on something. He says her soul cried out to his soul and asked, "Why am I still here?" Browning died in 1989 of natural causes while the case was still unresolved, but the suit has had a lasting effect on the law. In 1990, the Florida Supreme Court ruled that a living will can allow caregivers to withhold food and water from an incapacitated person, even when death is not imminent.I wonder if any serial killers will try to use this as a defense in the future?
"I'm psychic and my victim told me, through ESP, that she wanted me to kill her."
The husband who is living with a new girlfriend while his wife's mother and father are pleading with the judge to be able to have some say in the termination of the life they gave birth to.
This case is not as cut and dried as you make it out to be.
I'd like to sign one of those that says I don't want to be killed or allowed to die just because a doctor decides it is "best" for me.
The right-to-die waters are awfully muddy. We can see that by the way the people who want Terri to die are playing word games.
Word games are a good indicator of something amiss.
I was just reading an article which says that Physician Assisted Death, voluntary euthanasia and removal of life support are ethically equivalent. The author mentions that more people accept removal of life support than the other two methods of bringing about death. He suggests that, if people could be convinced of the ethical equivalency of all three, they (and physicians) would be much more accepting of Physician Assisted Death.
http://www.hemlocknj.org/equivale.html
Whether that physician responds to the patient’s repeated entreaty to "Help me die" by removing a life support system, by PAD or by euthanasia, in all three cases both intention and result are the same. In sum, there is no principled ethical difference among these three means to serve the dying patient. In this context, helping the public and physicians to recognize this ethical fact may well bring acceptance of PAD and euthanasia up to the 90% mark now current for refusal of treatment. (Interestingly, this is about the level of support for the Dutch way of dying now current in the Netherlands.) In such an environment it would appear that decriminalization of PAD and of euthanasia under reasonable rules barring abuse could easily be achieved.
That's the unfortunate thing about precedent....it seems to encourage the entrenchment of some pretty nasty practices.
BTTT
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.