Posted on 08/10/2008 3:15:39 PM PDT by rhema
Most inhumanities start small, like the beginning of a tsunami, but then build, as they head toward inevitable and unstoppable destruction.
It is difficult to pinpoint the precise beginning of the cultural tsunami that has devalued human life. Did it begin with the subjugation of women? Did it begin with slavery? The Nazis made their contribution with the Holocaust and Josef Mengele's hideous human experiments. Surely unrestricted abortion added to the growing list of inhumanities.
Now we have the next wave. Randy Stroup is a 53-year-old Oregon man who has prostrate cancer, but no insurance to cover his medical treatment. The state pays for treatment in some cases, but it has denied help to Stroup. State officials have determined that chemotherapy would be too expensive and so they have offered him an alternative: death.
Oregon's physician-assisted suicide law allows taxpayers to pay for someone to kill Stroup, because it's cheaper than trying to heal him. How twisted is this? Some have called this a "chilling" corruption of medical ethics, but medical ethics have been in the deep freeze for some time. The American Medical Association, which once strongly opposed abortion, now buys into the "choice" argument despite Hippocrates' admonition that physicians make a habit of two things"to help, or at least to do no harm."
In a culture that values all life, difficult decisions can be made about a life that is at an end and should be allowed to "go." That is a far cry from having a government bureaucrat or panel of "experts" play God and decide, based on cost alone, when your or my life no longer has value in the eyes of the state.
How we view and value ourselves affects how we view and value others. If we are mere evolutionary accidents with no moral value greater than cole slaw, then we quickly begin viewing others as part of the vegetable family. But if we are something far more special, even to the point of having a Creator who has "endowed" us with value beyond that of gold, silver, and paper money, then should we not be treated as such, even by the state?
The Randy Stroup case won't be the last of its kind. Just as Jack Kevorkian's illegal assisted suicide preceded its legalization in Oregon, so, too, will Randy Stroup be the test case in what amounts to mandated medical euthanasia ordered by the state.
When pro-lifers warned about the "slippery slope" more than three decades ago, they were dismissed as alarmists. Not anymore. Their prophecy is being fulfilled.
Most 53 year old men could access the equity in their home or use their 401k/IRA. If you are a 53 year old male and have no money or equity, well, something is not right (irresponsible) or unreported (lifetime of illness, bad luck, or some other reason beyond his control).
**The state pays for treatment in some cases, but it has denied help to Stroup. State officials have determined that chemotherapy would be too expensive and so they have offered him an alternative: death.**
Hopefully the family of Randy Stroup can raise some money so he can live!
Please notify me via FReepmail if you would like to be added to or taken off the Oregon Ping List.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church
Euthanasia
2276 Those whose lives are diminished or weakened deserve special respect. Sick or handicapped persons should be helped to lead lives as normal as possible.
2277 Whatever its motives and means, direct euthanasia consists in putting an end to the lives of handicapped, sick, or dying persons. It is morally unacceptable.
Thus an act or omission which, of itself or by intention, causes death in order to eliminate suffering constitutes a murder gravely contrary to the dignity of the human person and to the respect due to the living God, his Creator. The error of judgment into which one can fall in good faith does not change the nature of this murderous act, which must always be forbidden and excluded.
2278 Discontinuing medical procedures that are burdensome, dangerous, extraordinary, or disproportionate to the expected outcome can be legitimate; it is the refusal of "over-zealous" treatment. Here one does not will to cause death; one's inability to impede it is merely accepted. The decisions should be made by the patient if he is competent and able or, if not, by those legally entitled to act for the patient, whose reasonable will and legitimate interests must always be respected.
2279 Even if death is thought imminent, the ordinary care owed to a sick person cannot be legitimately interrupted. The use of painkillers to alleviate the sufferings of the dying, even at the risk of shortening their days, can be morally in conformity with human dignity if death is not willed as either an end or a means, but only foreseen and tolerated as inevitable Palliative care is a special form of disinterested charity. As such it should be encouraged.
It was Pope Paul VI, and we just recognized the 40th anniversary of Humanae Vitae, wherein he laid down the precise arguments of the consequences of man's imposed "limitations on birth", i.e.contraception. And yes, he was said to be "hysterical."
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.