To read the tribute to SFC Marcus Muralles, please click here
Friday, March 25, 2005
You Can't Have it Both Ways
(This post is going to get me in trouble. I know it is. But this is really bugging me. There is no easy answer. That's the point.)
I wasn't going to post about Terri anymore, unless something happened. There is nothing more to say that hasn't been said by people much more eloquent than me. But, I've been reading some posts that are really starting to get to me.
First, if you've read my blog for any amount of time, you know I'm Pro-Life, anti-euthanasia. For the record, I think Terri's feeding tube should be put back in, Michael should divorce her, and her family should become her guardians. Got it? Keep that in mind before you tar and feather me.
Several people are pointing out how horrific starvation/dehydration death is. In detail. And complaining that we wouldn't put prisoners on Death Row through what Terri is going through right now. And, they're right.
BUT... let's change some of the circumstances a bit... make this hypothetical, for just a moment. What IF there was a woman who had a chemical imbalance and had a heart attack. She became severely brain damaged ( some say no higher function at all). She had a living will, but the doctors didn't know about it in time, and they put in a feeding tube. They do everything they can for her, but... there is no chance of recovery. She is truly in a PVS. Her husband, who wanted nothing more than her recovery, turns over her living will over to the doctor.
What happens next? Her wishes are right there, for all to see. They take out her feeding tube, and make her as comfortable as possible, right? So... this woman is faced with the exact same horrific death that Terri is going through right now. No, they can't give her just a little too much morphine- that's against the law. They can just make her as comfortable as they can and let her go.
Where am I going with this? I'm not entirely sure. I mean... I am against euthanasia. I think that Dr. Kevorkian and his type are evil (because he wasn't helping terminally ill patients- he was helping whoever wanted to die). But, I really don't want people to suffer like Terri is, and people do suffer this way every day.
Am I saying that we should legalize euthanasia? Definitely not. That sends us down a road I'm not willing to travel, where Peter Singer and the people behind the Groningen Protocol would get to decide who lives and who dies. That is unacceptable.
Any time you take a stand, there are consequences. (Allowing abortion means millions of children who are wanted by someone, if not their biological parents, are killed. Making abortion illegal means that there would be more women injured and killed by illegal abortions and that women who are too selfish to do what's right will raise children they never wanted, and those children will know that. Euthanasia? Make it legal, and people who are not terminally ill will choose to take the easy way out. Keep it illegal, and terminal patients will linger in agony until their bodies finally surrender. Just a couple of examples.) That's just part of the deal.
I'm just asking that those of us who have taken the stand that every life, no matter how impaired, is sacred remember those we keep in this life. All of your lofty words mean nothing if that's all they are. Compassion is active, not passive.
