Schiavo Case
Ok, I'm going to weigh in. I know Lindsey says the husband is a horrible reprehensible human being, but Terri Schiavo needs to be allowed to die. I am a strong proponent of a complete culture of life but this is nonsense. This woman has not been able to use her brain in any meaningful way for 15 years, and she's now the subject of a desperate struggle to keep her alive. For what? The enjoyment of her parents? The fate of some cause? The fact that this whole misguided campaign is being driven by Christians shows very muddled thinking. Why should a Christian avoid death at any and all costs if we believe our soul will live on and a glorified body awaits?
We seem to have co-opted the two implicit laws of the secular conception of the good: 1) acquire as much as possible 2) live as long as possible. Neither are very compelling or Christian. Live your life as best you can, but when you die, you die. The most contradictory support of Terri Schiavo is from the Vatican, which rigidly opposes birth control. Why is it unacceptable to use medicine to prevent the beginning of life, but fantastic to intrude on nature and artificially prevent the end of a life?
Life is the greatest of all goods, and should be protected passionately. But do we believe that this value is so over-riding that any form or type of life should be promoted wherever possible? On what grounds are the same people asking for Terri to live opposing stem cells? Why should we not be cloning with wild abandon if we think artificially increasing and extendeding life is a duty? Or is it just that children must be naturally born, but once alive we should use every unholy synthetic tool at our disposal to keep them plugged into a wall for 200 years until their heart cannot be made to beat any longer?
I completely understand why the parents want to keep Terri alive. That's a very natural emotion. But at some point someone needs to step in and make a decision for them that they should not have to make themselves. Their daughter's brain is dead--and in essence so is she. To parade her through the national media in a half-alive state only dishonors her.
We seem to have co-opted the two implicit laws of the secular conception of the good: 1) acquire as much as possible 2) live as long as possible. Neither are very compelling or Christian. Live your life as best you can, but when you die, you die. The most contradictory support of Terri Schiavo is from the Vatican, which rigidly opposes birth control. Why is it unacceptable to use medicine to prevent the beginning of life, but fantastic to intrude on nature and artificially prevent the end of a life?
Life is the greatest of all goods, and should be protected passionately. But do we believe that this value is so over-riding that any form or type of life should be promoted wherever possible? On what grounds are the same people asking for Terri to live opposing stem cells? Why should we not be cloning with wild abandon if we think artificially increasing and extendeding life is a duty? Or is it just that children must be naturally born, but once alive we should use every unholy synthetic tool at our disposal to keep them plugged into a wall for 200 years until their heart cannot be made to beat any longer?
I completely understand why the parents want to keep Terri alive. That's a very natural emotion. But at some point someone needs to step in and make a decision for them that they should not have to make themselves. Their daughter's brain is dead--and in essence so is she. To parade her through the national media in a half-alive state only dishonors her.
posted by Luke @ 10:14 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home