Posted on 03/21/2005 4:05:17 PM PST by goldstategop
RUSH: Here's Gary in Champaign, Illinois. Gary, welcome to the program. It's nice to have you on with us.
CALLER: Thank you. Rush?
RUSH: Yes, sir.
CALLER: I'm a Republican. I voted for Bush, all that stuff like in your commercials, but I have to disagree with everybody on this one, and let me tell you why.
RUSH: All right.
CALLER: Six years ago my mother had a brain aneurysm, went through a surgery to repair it, had another operation, procedure and a few other things. Finally the neurosurgeon, the neurologist came and told us she was in a chronic or permanent vegetative state. And for nine months I convinced my five siblings to withdraw the tube feeding her and let her die naturally. We did not kill our mother, we let her die naturally. Now, I've seen film of this lady, I've seen the news reports, doctors have said she is in a chronic or permanent vegetative state. What that means is, you have very, very basic brain function. The part of your brain that makes you breathe still works, you may have some response to pain or other minor basic stimuli but they have absolutely zero cognitive function. That lady has no idea what's going on around her. She doesn't know the difference from night to day. She doesn't know who people are. She doesn't feel anything at all. The right thing for her to do is what her husband wants to do, and that is pull the plug on her and let her die a natural death.
RUSH: Okay. You've told a personal story.
CALLER: I've been there.
RUSH: Well, so have I. And I'm going to tell you a personal story.
CALLER: I do not think that I killed my mother. I let her die naturally.
RUSH: I know you don't want to think that. You let her die. You had the doctors remove the feeding tube so you didn't even do it. She died a natural death, starvation, on the basis that she couldn't feed herself, so she starved. I'm just going to go back to the first hour, and, you know, the New York Times ran a brilliant story on Sunday that starvation is painless, it's a very dignified way to go. We could rid the world of poverty by letting them all starve. They may not all be in a vegetative state, but they soon will end up in one after they don't eat or drink long enough. Just gonna let 'em die.
Let me tell you my own personal story. My grandmother, my maternal grandmother. To give you the short, down-and-dirty of this, she had a stroke and was sent to the hospital, and the doctors said, "We don't know how long she's going to live like this." She was not in a coma but she was not quite there. The doctors said, "We don't know how long she's going to live like this, but we're going to give you 48 hours, you've got to make up your mind what you want to do, pull the tube or send her to a nursing home and pay for it because we need the bed." So my mother, my father had passed away, my mother talked to my brother and I about it and she wanted to pull the tube. And I said, "Mother, you really want the burden of having killed your mother? You really want that?" Before the 48 hours had passed a decision had to be made, my grandmother had another stroke while nobody was there and passed away in the hospital. At least that was the story. I've always doubted it. Given that we were given 48 hours to move her out of there, I've often wondered. Nobody will ever know, so it's just speculation on my part. I don't know how many patients are actually killed already on the basis that they don't know what's going on, it's better for them, we need the bed, insurance isn't going to cover this, blah, blah, all these decisions.
Now, I know, Gary, that you don't want to think that you killed your mom, and this sort of thing, but the argument about this woman exists because I think your scenario of her circumstances doesn't jibe with what some family members are saying. Some family members are saying she does respond to stimuli, that she does know when her dad and mom walk in the room, this sort of thing. So I think that the way you have to understand this -- well, you, the audience, the way you, the audience, have to understand, because everybody -- well, 90% of the people on the phones waiting to talk to me disagree with me on this, and I think the culture of death is very seductive. We can tell ourselves that we're doing the best thing for the person that's going to die. And we do that to hide the fact that we don't want to be inconvenienced ourselves in some way, either financially or personally or a combination of the two or what have you. And individual case, okay, so Gary's mom died the way she did, that's not going to wreck society, a single instance, it's not going to, you know, sow the seed, fabric of destruction. However, when a culture of death overtakes a society, and we have one now, you know, we've gotten to a point where it's permissible and even heroic to abort babies.
In order to make that argument we've now started calling pregnancy a disease. Pregnancy is a disease, it's not a natural state for women say some abortion rights activists. Then on the tail end of the life spectrum we decide, "Well, this person wouldn't want to live this way." Even though they may never have said that they don't want to live this way we assume it for them because we project. We don't think we would want to live that way. "I don't want to see my family member suffer," or what have you. And I realize that each one of you that have been in this situation do not think that you have contributed anything but love and the goodness of your wishes to your family member in taking this action. But there are societal ramifications for all of these particularly as they accumulate and the cumulative effect of the culture of death is one of the things that takes us to where we are at now. And that is that we literally have divided up sides in this argument that perplex me, and they give me pause. There's an actual energized enthusiasm for this woman's death out there, and there's an actual energized enthusiasm to save her life. I can understand the energized effort and enthusiasm to save life. We're oriented toward that in so many areas of our society. Sadly, we're also oriented on the side of ending life, and there are a lot of people-- I hear all this talk, Democrats have all these accusations, Republicans have ideological attached to this. Let me tell you something, if you want to argue who's more ideologically at risk here by losing this, take a look at the left.
They've got two things they're going to lose on, if the judge here -- and he's a Clinton-appointed judge, and I have no idea what's going to happen in this case -- but if the left loses it, they lost twice. They're going to have lost because the Congress has exercised Article 3 and is exercising its authority over the judiciary. They can't stand that because that's going to send a bad signal over their filibuster of Bush judges. The second thing they're going to lose on is their base, the pro-abort, feminist base. I mean, they're as actively involved in this as -- "Well, Rush, this has nothing to do with abortion." -- no, it doesn't have anything to do with abortion. It has to do with the rights of individuals under the so-called declaration of privacy or what have you to terminate a life they'd rather not deal with. Which is what abortion is. That's all it is. I want to kill this baby, I don't want to deal with it. You come up with other excuses, "I don't want it born to poverty, oh, it's a sorry circumstances," da-da-da-da-da-da, but boil it down, that's what it is, and if they lose both of these -- and that's why they're panicked. They've got two ideological battles that they're fighting in this little battle here over Terri Schiavo, and they're afraid to lose both of them. But don't think they don't have an ideological stake here, either.
Some of you may remember Rush's caller "Peter the Lawyer" during the Monica Lewinski scandal. In my opinion he was Rush's best caller ever -- absolutely brilliant.
His real name is Peter Mulhern, and he has a blog. His recent pieces on Terry Schivo are courageous and insightful.
http://petermulhern.typepad.com/
And it will portrayed as 'a duty to die'. You know, you gotta get the spin just right.
And what have we spent years and years and millions and millions of dollars in medical advances if not to extend the quality and length of life? And now we are told that it is too expensive to keep someone alive. What a waste of all of those resources.
According to his 'logic', an anesthetic is artificial and patients should undergo surgery without it.
Already done. And quietly. Organ donors are now only required to have a stopped heart for five minutes. Brain death no longer matters.
It's yesterday once more.
Consciousness is not proven to be a function of the cerebral cortex. Karen Quinlan destroyed that belief. Yet I keep hearing it about Terri.
What you may find is that we don't place rational thinking on the same pedestal for worship as those in the ivory towers do.
To borrow heavily from Wesley Smith...
Terri's vulnerability offers a magnifying mirror to the world. Our reactions to her plight say much about who we are.
What you will find here are primarily people who see Terri as made in His image, and therefore life, worthy of life.
Tell a lie often enough...
"But to actually create some situation where we would be the source and control of what would eventually kill him, that would be murder."
Precisely. My grandfather also suffered from terminal Alzheimer's and had a DNR from the beginning of the disease. Unfortunately while his brain was ravaged the rest of his physical condition was outstanding.
At the end he was on a feeding tube and in a rather vegetative state. Finally the part of his brain that controlled breathing started to fail and he died of pneumonia. But he was kept fed and hydrated, and well-sedated at the end. It was very peaceful from what I was told.
There is a difference between not treating a terminal illness and purposely hastening someone's death.
I am sorry about your father. Alzheimer's is harder on the family than it is on the patient, in the long run. When grandpa finally passed on, it was a relief.
Thank God so far in my family we have not had to make this heart wrenching decision. If we were in this position my loved ones would never ever be starved to death. I'd fight for them. I'd risk jail.
My Catholic Faith is rich in life and liberty and joyous are we filled with the conviction and knowledge that only God 'giveth and taketh'.
God have mercy on the "Death-o-crats".
Hubby and I discussed it and we are too. I printed out one yesterday from this site
Scroll down to the Healthcare section...it has a valid living will for each state, they are free.
The sad fact is that may of the 'facts-only' folks are relying on the facts as adjucated by Judge Greer. They aren't willing to dig into the possibility that Judge Greer has as much of a death impulse as the Shiavo creep. His comment that the rule for humanity is raising a spoon to your mouth should be grounds for impeachment, both as a judge and as a moral human being.
That is an abomination! His ignorance knows no depths and his physical blindness penetrates to every part of this being!
Adding to the ignorance about the facts of Terri's condition and treatment, we have a new ignorance spreading through the land regarding "living wills," more accurately known as advance directives. They may end up being an exercise in futility anyway.
When you're in relatively good health, what do you know about how you want to die? Not much. Who will determine the point at which your advance directive takes effect? Who will determine that moment of incapacitation when you are no longer able to make decisions for yourselves? Hmmm? There are more variables than the general public realizes. Many more. If you choose no intubation whatsoever, do you know you are choosing to dehydrate as well as starve to death?
You could be denying yourselves measures that would temporarily support your life, and later be able to recover. Will there now be a rush for people to condemn themselves to death?
Living wills = the new ignorance.
This is the first time I've seen anyone say this. Exactly.
I know a boy who is 14 and has severe cerebral palsy. He will never sustain more than the development of a 6-month-old baby. He can't swallow saliva and does need round-the-clock suctioning.
But he feels joy and pain! He goes to a "school" every day. He smiles and even laughs. He is loved by his brother and sisters, and his parents.
I think of him when I think of Terri. How horrible to take away a feeding tube and basically murder someone by the slow torture of starvation! Just because her brain isn't working.
I too have a son with autism, though mine must not be as profoundly touched as your dear one. I have no doubt that if amnios detected autism, people with 5-month-old fetuses who test + for it would abort them!! How awful.
The right to "choose" is so UNcompassionate at either end of life. This culture had better wake up. We do not want to say that we differ from the eugenics of the Nazis "only in degrees."
Bump!!!
You mean death wills don't you.....
That's what they amount to. That's what people are being urged to do now: orchestrate your own death. But you can't do it, no matter what you put down on paper. This is the anti-CHristian death cult on the march.
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.