Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: The Red Zone
Yet you would want the law to be, and remain, broad enough to pull others unwilling and unwitting into the pit where you deem you yourself ought to go.

Absolutely, not. If I had my way, everyone's wishes would be enforced for them. I think it is very important that everyone write their specific desires down, so that we don't have any more of these debates about 'true' wishes than we must.

I've written my living will. Have you written yours? If not, please do so. If you want to be maintained indefinitely after your mind is gone, that's absolutely fine with me (provided, of course, you pay the cost of your own care).

356 posted on 04/16/2005 12:52:47 AM PDT by winstonchurchill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 353 | View Replies ]


To: winstonchurchill

Why should documentation that I don't want to be starved to death be required? Why shouldn't the burden rest on those who want to go down to the pit?


357 posted on 04/16/2005 1:00:07 AM PDT by The Red Zone ( Florida, the sun-shame state and Georgia, the rotten peach.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 356 | View Replies ]

To: winstonchurchill

I found interesting what you stated:

**If you want to be maintained indefinitely after your mind is gone, that's absolutely fine with me (provided, of course, you pay the cost of your own care).**


Most interesting, I thought, was the idea that the person pay for the cost of their own care. How can one pay for their own care, if they cannot work; or once their insurance runs out?

Should society be expected to bear the costs of the decidedly infirm? Is that a religious belief (hence should not be covered by government, i.e., medicare or medicaid)? or is it truly a governmental responsibility?

Even as a Christian, I am not sure that I believe that the deeply infirm (cannot eat, swallow, drink on their own, cannot "think" to request to eat, swallow or drink, etc.) are *entitled* to life prolonging measures (including resuscitators, feeding tubes, etc.).

I've been searching the Scriptures for information about this, but obviously there were no resuscitators or feeding tubes in those days (perhaps primitive feeding tubes?), but it seems today that Science has preempted God. And so we have the dilemma.

What do you believe would be the

(a) moral answer

(b) legal answer

to the issue of the infirm paying for the cost of their care. Should it be the responsibility of the government, or mandated social responsibility (monies raised through taxes--and essentially socialistic)?
Regarding all the people that believe the infirm should be maintained at all costs,


371 posted on 04/16/2005 6:26:32 PM PDT by thinkingman129 (questioning clears the way to understanding.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 356 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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