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

Skip to comments.

Profound questions from the Schiavo case
Minneapolis Star Tribune ^ | 6/16/05 | Katherine Kersten

Posted on 06/16/2005 6:53:51 AM PDT by rhema

. . .People of goodwill may disagree about Terri Schiavo's case. Yet as our society strays from its traditional belief in the essential dignity of every human life, we all must grapple with the implications of the notion that some lives are "not worth living."

Today, assisted suicide is lawful in Oregon. In the Netherlands, according to the New York Times, prosecutors no longer pursue cases against doctors who kill severely impaired babies after birth. The temptation to deal with the defective and incompetent by eliminating them is likely to grow as our society ages. Today, approximately 4.5 million Americans have Alzheimer's disease. In coming decades, projections suggest that about 40 percent of us will spend roughly 10 years in an infirm, demented condition. The way we deal with this situation will say much about us as a society.

Currently, the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum is staging an exhibit . . . called "Deadly Medicine: Creating the Master Race." It examines the idea of "lebensunwertes Leben" -- lives not worthy of life --which the Nazis used to justify their elimination of thousands deemed unfit to live: the retarded, the defective and the seriously ill.

Some German intellectuals championed this idea well before the Nazi era began. A 1920 book, for example, decried "the meticulous care shown to existences which are not just absolutely worthless" -- the disabled and deformed -- "but even of negative value." It called for applying the "healing remedy" of premature death, in order to "eliminat[e] those who were born unfit for life or who later became so."

Today, we must ensure that we ourselves are not tempted to start down this slippery slope --moved by free choice rather than totalitarian edict, and seduced by a shallow notion of "death with dignity."

(Excerpt) Read more at startribune.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; US: Minnesota
KEYWORDS: emotionallydisabled; getoverit; schiavo; swindlers; terrischiavo; wackjobs
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 301 next last
To: Jibaholic
You want to require this form because without it people will not have medical proxy power for their spouse. Even when married. That undermines marriage. Marriage means one flesh.

Oftentimes the hospital is an interested party in this. IIRC, in the Karen Ann Quinlan case, her mother (she was unmarried) and the hospital both went to court for an order to allow her respirator to be removed, as neither wanted to be guilty of murder.

As far as the "one flesh" - that may be Biblically correct but in the secular world you are two separate entities.

81 posted on 06/16/2005 10:05:00 AM PDT by Abby4116
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: k2blader
When you're supporting state-sanctioned murder, you aren't supporting morality.

So if I go into a PVS and my wife decides to pull the tube I've been murdered by her?

82 posted on 06/16/2005 10:06:17 AM PDT by Jibaholic (The facts of life are conservative - Margaret Thatcher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: Jibaholic

Get off it already. You're just upset because people now know you *aren't* a conservative.


83 posted on 06/16/2005 10:07:04 AM PDT by k2blader (Was it wrong to kill Terri Shiavo? YES - 83.8%. FR Opinion Poll.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Jibaholic
Your apparent lack of comprehension is why I keep stressing the importance of the fact that there WAS NO LONGER A COVENANT between MS and Terri. He had ALREADY BROKEN THE COVENANT by committing adultery BEFORE she died. Good grief...

BROKEN COVENANT = NO RIGHTS.

84 posted on 06/16/2005 10:07:34 AM PDT by ravingnutter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: k2blader

It looks like someone knows they are on the losing side of the debate and changes the subject rather than answer the question :)


85 posted on 06/16/2005 10:08:20 AM PDT by Jibaholic (The facts of life are conservative - Margaret Thatcher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Jibaholic
"conservatives" want to undermine marriage. A spouse is supposed to be able to make those kinds of decisions.

Perhaps you should move to a Muslim country where husbands are more than free to do whatever they please with their property, I mean, their wives, no questions asked.

86 posted on 06/16/2005 10:10:17 AM PDT by k2blader (Was it wrong to kill Terri Shiavo? YES - 83.8%. FR Opinion Poll.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: ravingnutter

Exactly.


87 posted on 06/16/2005 10:11:06 AM PDT by k2blader (Was it wrong to kill Terri Shiavo? YES - 83.8%. FR Opinion Poll.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: ravingnutter
Your apparent lack of comprehension is why I keep stressing the importance of the fact that there WAS NO LONGER A COVENANT

I go into a PVS. My wife tries therapy but I don't respond. She pulls the tube, which is what I've told her I want. Years later she meets someone new and starts a new family.

Except that the government didn't let her pull the tube. I don't want my wife to be trapped in limbo forever.

88 posted on 06/16/2005 10:11:33 AM PDT by Jibaholic (The facts of life are conservative - Margaret Thatcher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: All
Would you people just listen to yourselves!!!!
Sitting here reading this chit makes me think it should be over at DU.
Why don't ya'll just agree to disagree??
Or just break out the tinfoil!
89 posted on 06/16/2005 10:11:39 AM PDT by ReeWalker (Life isn't fair...GET USED TO IT!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: Jibaholic

The only ones losing the debate are the ones arguing in favor of state-sanctioned murder.

See tagline.


90 posted on 06/16/2005 10:12:57 AM PDT by k2blader (Was it wrong to kill Terri Shiavo? YES - 83.8%. FR Opinion Poll.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: k2blader

Try and answer the question this time: If I go into a PVS and my wife pulls the tube, according to my wishes, was I murdered?


91 posted on 06/16/2005 10:14:35 AM PDT by Jibaholic (The facts of life are conservative - Margaret Thatcher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Jibaholic

Please do a search on misdiagnosis PVS and be careful of wording of any documents to be sure what you want is what you are actually asking for. A diagnosis of PVS is really only an opinion of the particular Dr who may have his own agenda. Diagnosing PVS is not like a Dr saying you have a broken arm or tests show you are diabetic. It is a very subjective diagnosis.

The issues around the Terri situation are so much more complicated than just the issue of husband/wife or even PVS. Like any other issue that attracts a lot of attention there are some who are "out there" who were involved on both sides.

Ideally these choices should remain with the family; the problem arises when the family can not work it out. I have told my husband if I am ever in the same condition Terri was to please keep away anyone with an agenda of death, get me the best possible care and do whatever he feels is right under the circumstances-including removal of life support. but under NO condition is he to ever allow me to dehydrate to death.

What a lot of people missed was the fear this brought out in disabled people, that a probate judge could make a decision to end their life...until I found out about Terri I did NOT realize that type of decision could be made by others without the patient having a signed legal document saying that was their wish. I had a big problem with the verbal, she said she didn't want to live like this...I had a lot of other issues but that one is front and center with me.

I will have to disagree when you say Republicans were on the wrong side of this issue- which Republicans? Judge Greer is a Republican as is Senator King and many others who fought against saving Terri. Some Republicans fought to save her but so did some Democrats.

We will have to disagree on this, but that's ok- I do think the Politicians and officials who tried to stop this were right to do so and I hope they would do the same for me.


92 posted on 06/16/2005 10:20:06 AM PDT by Tammy8
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Jibaholic
"I wouldn't want my wife to be trapped in limbo forever"

I would that think that would be preferable than being trapped in hell forever for murdering an innocent. You keep repeating the same thing over and over. There does not seem to be any point in responding to your questions. You seem to feel that a marriage contract gives you the right, even, the obligation to kill your spouse if she is not in 100% perfect operating order. I believe you are incorrect, that murdering the imperfect is still murder. If you are not able to say that murder of an innocent human being is immoral, what are you willing to say is immoral? My guess it that there is nothing that can be deemed immoral because you don't believe in morality. I will never accept your phony premise that interfering in a marriage vow is a worse crime than murder. If that were the case adulterers would receive the death penalty.
93 posted on 06/16/2005 10:26:28 AM PDT by Barb4Bush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Barb4Bush
I would that think that would be preferable than being trapped in hell forever for murdering an innocent.

You must be Catholic because I believe that faith in Jesus Christ is what gets you into Heaven.

You seem to feel that a marriage contract gives you the right, even, the obligation to kill your spouse if she is not in 100% perfect operating order.

I never said that and I never implied it. If my wife were to tell me that she'd want to stay alive not matter how damaged or destroyed her brain or body is then I would use all my power to fight for that.

What I am saying is that the marriage contract should determine where the authority in making the decision comes from. Not from the government, not from a judge, and not even from the family.

94 posted on 06/16/2005 10:29:38 AM PDT by Jibaholic (The facts of life are conservative - Margaret Thatcher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: Jibaholic
You are truly an illiterate...

Your wife is free to pull your plug and then marry someone else because she did not break the covenant. She is allowed to marry after you die.

She is not free to pull your plug after she has committed adultery while you are still alive because she has broken the covenant by committing adultery.

If you can't understand that simple reasoning...please ask your wife to pull the plug NOW.

95 posted on 06/16/2005 10:34:03 AM PDT by ravingnutter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Jibaholic

I am Catholic and as for the rest of your argument, What's the point in repating my answer? NO! A marriage vow does not give you the right to murder your spouse.


96 posted on 06/16/2005 10:37:46 AM PDT by Barb4Bush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: ravingnutter
Your wife is free to pull your plug and then marry someone else because she did not break the covenant. She is allowed to marry after you die. She is not free to pull your plug after she has committed adultery while you are still alive because she has broken the covenant by committing adultery.

Suppose my family and the government and a bunch of internet activists stopped my wife from pulling the plug? Her choices then become to either not move on with her life (unnaccetable to me) until a decades-long legal battle is resolved, or to "break" the marriage covenant. I'd want her to take the second option.

97 posted on 06/16/2005 10:37:52 AM PDT by Jibaholic (The facts of life are conservative - Margaret Thatcher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: Barb4Bush
A marriage vow does not give you the right to murder your spouse.

So if I were in a PVS, my wife shouldn't be allowed to remove the tube? Even though earlier in the thread you had conceded that she could if I had a living will?

98 posted on 06/16/2005 10:39:37 AM PDT by Jibaholic (The facts of life are conservative - Margaret Thatcher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: Jibaholic

Alright, just you. You're allowed to murder your wife anytime you want for whatever reason. And just cause it's you no one will say it wrong. OK?


99 posted on 06/16/2005 10:46:42 AM PDT by Barb4Bush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: Barb4Bush

Barb, you said in post #62 of this thread that people should be allowed to make living wills. Suppose in the exact case above my wife and I had a living will. Then she wouldn't be murdering me if I were in a PVS?


100 posted on 06/16/2005 10:53:46 AM PDT by Jibaholic (The facts of life are conservative - Margaret Thatcher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 301 next last

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.

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