Posted on 03/27/2005 1:30:00 PM PST by Gondring
Please don't tell me you are falling for the Guardian's propaganda. If you follow that logic, every single person on a feeding tube can be legally euthanized.
Not a surprise.
Next time you mention me, I'd appreciate a ping.
I don't think it sets up the next step in the death cult's plan any more than the right to keep and bear arms sets up some revolutionary plan.
I simply believe in respecting people and their preferences, not blindly insisting on "life at all costs" or whatever.
Secondly, I am against the feds interfering in a marriage.
Thirdly, I am against the feds interfering locally when due process has been more than followed.
My problem here, it seems, is that I am a conservative, not a monarchist authoritarian.
So what?!? Lex mulla, lex nulla.
The sick person in a vegetative state, awaiting recovery or a natural end, still has the right to basic health care (nutrition, hydration, cleanliness, warmth, etc.), and to the prevention of complications related to his confinement to bed. He also has the right to appropriate rehabilitative care and to be monitored for clinical signs of eventual recovery.
I should like particularly to underline how the administration of water and food, even when provided by artificial means, always represents a natural means of preserving life, not a medical act. Its use, furthermore, should be considered, in principle, ordinary and proportionate, and as such morally obligatory, insofar as and until it is seen to have attained its proper finality, which in the present case consists in providing nourishment to the patient and alleviation of his suffering.
The obligation to provide the "normal care due to the sick in such cases" (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Iura et Bona, p. IV) includes, in fact, the use of nutrition and hydration (cf. Pontifical Council "Cor Unum", Dans le Cadre, 2, 4, 4; Pontifical Council for Pastoral Assistance to Health Care Workers, Charter of Health Care Workers, n. 120). The evaluation of probabilities, founded on waning hopes for recovery when the vegetative state is prolonged beyond a year, cannot ethically justify the cessation or interruption of minimal care for the patient, including nutrition and hydration. Death by starvation or dehydration is, in fact, the only possible outcome as a result of their withdrawal. In this sense it ends up becoming, if done knowingly and willingly, true and proper euthanasia by omission.
In this regard, I recall what I wrote in the Encyclical Evangelium Vitae, making it clear that "by euthanasia in the true and proper sense must be understood an action or omission which by its very nature and intention brings about death, with the purpose of eliminating all pain"; such an act is always "a serious violation of the law of God, since it is the deliberate and morally unacceptable killing of a human person" (n. 65).
Barbarism is a lot closer to starving and dehydrating a helpless woman.
Early chritians did not do that.
Terri did not have years of therapy. At least 4 nurses have now gone public after years of intiimidation.
This is one of them. Olga, the one Terri was closest to, the one who defied Michael, is dead- car wreck.
http://www.hospicepatients.org/heidi-law-09-03-affidavit-re-terri-schiavo-michael.html
My God, these people are moral midgets if they don't understand the difference between the two situations. I think the very fact that they keep making these comparisons show just how shallow they are.
So? Does Judiasm prevent a person from leaving the faith if that's his preference, and he wishes no sustaining treatment?
If so, then it's "religion by compulsion"... if not, then it's fine...I have no problem with a person wanting to have their body kept going.
But don't make me have the same.
you say "no evidence"...and then give evidence.
Plus, there are others who heard her say it.
And finally, it was the Schindlers who encouraged Mr. Schiavo to start dating.
Well, you're talking about two different issues here. One is whether or not we have a right to suicide. The other is what it takes to establish with certainty that one is taking that option. The first point is legitimately debatable, but IMO the second one is not. There is no way that Terri Schiavo has made her wishes clear here. It's one thing to say it, and it's another thing to draw it up legally and have it signed and notarized. She failed to do that.
What is more I am of the opinion that even if one draws up a living will, one should also give a loved one a durable power of attorney that allows them to override that will if they so choose. There really is no way to anticipate every possible scenario or every possible future medical advance in a living will. So someone who is of sound mind needs to be able to make decisions in the moment. Thus the living will does not become a do-not-resuscitate order but rather a do-not-resuscitate permission slip.
Yes, I know that this increases the chance that said loved one will continue treatment past where you would have chosen it yourself. But it is also quite possible that you would have made the decision to live as well---and if you pick your guardian well, he/she may understand you well enough to know. If by God's good fortune you come out of your coma/PVS/whatever, you will thank them for being there to make that decision. And if you don't, well, you won't know the difference, frankly.
Overall however I think that any legal structure that we put in place must favor life when the question is ambiguous as it is in Terri's case.
Interesting tidbit. Thanks for the tip!
You are sadly misinformed about the early Church,there were titanic battles about the creed to mention one,way before Augustine,and bishops and believers paid with their lives. Combatting heresy did not start in the 5th century.
The law matters in a nation of laws.
Do you remember what Paul Scofield, in the character of Thomas More in "A Man for all Seasons," said to his son-in-law, who said he would cut down laws to defeat the devil?
“This country's planted thick with laws from coast to coast-man's laws, not God's-and if you cut them down-and you're just the man to do it-d'you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake.”
We don't cast aside laws when we don't like them. We change them.
On the other hand, we have extensive evidence that the state of Florida is under the tyranny of a runaway leftist judiciary.
If you truly took self determination over tyranny, you'd be on the side of life, Gondring.
I was a neighbor and friend of the Cruzans. I agonized for years in what Joe went through for Nancy. You are correct that most state laws reguarding life support stem from Joe Cruzan pursuing this to the highest courts.
Excellent point...it is amazing how we're afraid to talk about the danger of the Jewish Left in America(which is horribly evil),but we allow constant references to the "Christian Right"....What is also amazing is how people can fear people who are trying to save the innocent from destruction...Almost like trying to argue that the SS are "good guys"....and GIs are the bad ones.....I don't have a problem with Terri Schiavo or anybody else deciding that they want to book out...the problem is Michael(and virtually everything he has done including now, forbidding Holy Communion) has show that his concern(and hence his word) is worthless
I don't criticize Mr. Schindler for his mother. What I criticize are his own actions in this case.
I'm sorry for your loss and the tough situation you had to endure.
I have wondered where Dunce Scottus stands on this entire affair.
Worth repeating to ALL....
If his mother couldn't get air herself, doesn't she have the right to have it provided, if we go with the logic that Mrs. Schiavo must be force-fed through a tube if she doesn't get food herself?
The MSM has been misinforming the public for months about this case, so I can excuse the ignorance of a leftist Brit. Out of charity, I will presume that you are not an idiot, and really don't understand the difference. Pay attention, class is in.
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.