|
| POLITICS OF LIFE AND DEATH |
| Thursday, March 31, 2005 |
| Warning: This article makes many generalizations and is not intended to offend. It is simply food for thought.
During the Terri Shaivo ordeal that has captured the nation's attention, it was noted that the position one took often ran down ideological, dare I say, even partisan lines. Looking at it clinically, you either thought she should be left alive or allowed to die.
People on the "right" thought that she should be allowed to live and that to take away her food and water would be tantamount to murder.
People on the "left" thought that her suffering should be put to an end, and that no one would want to live in the state she lived in, therefore let her die in dignity.
Right and Left, Blue and Red
In my conversation with most on the left, one recurring theme has revealed itself over and over. Rights, freedom to do what one feels right, instant gratification, and emotional affirmation seem to be important to the left. If this is true, then primary motivators in the left psyche is a centrality of self and the quality of living. In Terri's case, she may have been suffering or unable to do things that bring self-fulfillment, therefore what does she have to live for?
My personal moral code indicates to me that I have been placed on this earth, not only to enjoy the fruits of it, but to serve God and others in any capacity I can. My personal faith states that I would definitely be better off dead, but while I still have breath I have the opportunity in some way, shape or form to serve others. This mindset is often found on the "right". From this perspective, a good example of this is Christopher Reeve. Christopher the paraplegic accomplished far more than Christopher the superman ever did.
A life of purpose, rather than randomness and self-centrality, changes one's perspective on the value of a life. Terri may have been in the condition she was in for a purpose--possibly to teach others, give her parents purpose, or for a myriad of other reasons.
(Please don't bring such superficial issues into this as "she wouldn't want to be a burden to society, family, etc. I get tired of the false martyrdom being bandied about the net).]
NOTE: This article subject to revision. Comments welcome.
|
posted by Jack Mercer @ 3/31/2005 05:15:00 PM   |
|
| 3 Comments: |
-
Dawn! Your insight on this is incredible, and something I am just now hearing! This bears more looking into. Will be back to discuss!
-
See, I completely disagree. (With you, Jack; I didn't read Dawn's post, sorry!)
I'm as far right as pretty much anyone I know, and I thought it was time for her to die. I was in favor of enforcing (and then using it as impetus to change, if the public so desired) the existing laws.
Also, I think keeping a woman like Mrs. Schiavo "alive" for fifteen years is more barbaric than allowing her to die.
Anyway. Just thought I'd shake things up. :)
-
Child Care costs are one of the most expensive costs associated with going back to work. Finding waya to cut down on child costs without sacrificing Quality Child Care is a top priority for all working parents.
Link to my site: child care home policy
|
| |
| << Home |
| |
|
|
|
| About Me |
|
Name: Jack Mercer
Home:
About Me:
See my complete profile
"Snipet" (pronounced: snipe - it) is not a word.It is a derivative of two words: "Snipe" and "Snippet".
Miriam Webster defines Snipe as: to aim a carping or snide attack, or: to shoot at exposed individuals (as of an enemy's forces) from a usually concealed point of vantage.
Miriam Webster defines Snippet as: : a small part, piece, or thing; especially : a brief quotable passage.
In short, "Snipets" are brief, snide shots at exposed situations from a concealed vantage point.
WARNING! With due reverence to the Bill of Rights and the First Amendment there is NO comment policy on the News Snipet.
|
| Other things |
| Archives |
|
| Politics |
|
| Template by |
|
|
Dawn! Your insight on this is incredible, and something I am just now hearing! This bears more looking into. Will be back to discuss!