The bit was not about her death or her life, it was about the public hysteria surrounding a tragic, private decision. Some, like myself, don’t believe the public has any business inserting itself into the middle of such things and found the circus surrounding this case to be disgusting-— as the skit demonstrated. A children’s musical fit the reality, from my perspective. It wasn’t to make fun of her, her life, or her death and the prolonging of that process. It was directed at those who made it into a circus and did it with alarming vicious self righteousness that apparently continues today, for some. I don’t think it was very well done or even funny, but the overblown reaction to it is silly.
There are some who believe that society has the obligation to come the the aid of the helpless. There are some who would defend the rights of a third rate TV show over the rights of a human being.
Then by your reasoning, the *husband* should have just offed her instead of demanding a judge get involved. Besides, it wasn't just the pro-lifers who *inserted* themselves in a private matter. Her own flesh and blood family was fighting to save her life. I didn't hear them complain about the support they got in their efforts. They could have told everyone to back off, that their help wasn't welcome, and they didn't.
Your *Everyone should mind their own business* mentality is typical libertarian pro-death argument. You are not fooling anyone with that weak excuse. We know too well what kind of arguments the deathbots use to defend their position to make it look like they're for *freedom* and liberty when their real agenda is to push the pro-death position without looking like you're really taking it.
You never answered my earlier question so I'll pose it again to give you the opportunity....."If you were tied down and starved and dehydrated to death, I presume then that you wouldn’t object if someone made fun of you and what you went through. Right? I mean, it would be just too funny to watch it, wouldn’t it? And you’d just be having a laugh a minute the whole time you were dying. Right?"
What was alarming and vicious was not people who didn’t want to see her murdered more cruelly than is allowed with animals, but the fact that her legal in name only husband was allowed by a corrupt government and judiciary to carry out his very public murder. And second, that callous humans such as yourself see it bass-ackwards.
People with no morals love to throw out the epithet “self-righteous” at anyone with morals. You aren’t using the term correctly, at all. What you really mean is that people who don’t want to see humans murdered because they are helpless make you feel angry and hateful and so you toss out insults like froth coming from the jaws of a mad dog.
Full of sound and fury, signifying nothing (except revealing your own viciousness).