W. Kiernan wrote:
> jthorn65 at sbcglobal.net wrote:
> >
> > Marta hasn't exactly been the picture of rationality in
> > this discussion...
>
When it comes to equating the right to die as oneself (or spouse with your consent) sees fit, that is indeed an irrational leap of faith.
> For many of us the Schaivo case was only an interesting debate topic;
> Marta Russell sees it literally as a matter of life-and-death. I think
> Marta believes it it is a small step from the authorities pulling the
> feeding tube on Terri Schiavo, for whatever reasons they did so, to
> those same authorities doing away with Marta Russell because it has
> become too costly to some hospital corporation to keep her alive.
I wonder if Marta is familiar with the case of Sue Rodriguez, a terminally ill woman here in B.C. who was disease (ALS) was progressing swiftly and usually always ends with the person choking to death, unable to control their muscles. Even before that, they must have their bottoms cleaned and any number of other demeaning situations that , for some people at least, make life not worth living. That *should* be their right to decide. If we don't own our own lives, then what do we have?
Anyhow, Sue Rodriguez petitioned the government for the right to end her own life. But who shows up to stop her? Precisely the same groups. The Anti-abortion crowd came up and got the "Persons With Disabilities" activists riled up with the same rhetoric (You're next!) and we had a circus identical to the one in Florida. Many of the players names were the same. I wouldn't doubt if Marta was there. She certainly heard about it. But there is no relationship between the right to die peacefully and being murdered by the state. The only thing they have in common is death. Period.
So... in any case, Sue lost. The "God (read that 'the Church') owns you" crowd were successful in insuring that Sue died of suffocation, one of the most frightening experiences that a person can possibly undergo. A horrible end that was forced on her by someone elses religious beliefs. Those same religious beliefs are why we are allowed to do the humane thing for an animals. God doesn't care about the lives of animals. In fact, he gave us "dominion over" them. Isn't that right, Mahoney, Falwell, Terry ?
This
> isn't tinfoil-hat craziness on Marta's part; in 1999 George W. Bush
> signed legislation called "the Futile Care Act" stipulating exactly that
> in the state of Texas. Her not-unreasonable perception is not going to
> induce Marta to play the cool, calm "picture of rationality" when
> discussing the issue.
>
> Now that this topic is in the public's eye, I'd like to see defenders of
> Michael Schiavo turn and attack the obscene cruelty of the Texas "Futile
> Care Act" in particular, and the inhumanity of the U.S.A.'s for-profit
> health care system in general. In the richest country in the history of
> mankind, for a hospital company to allow Marta Russell or someone like
> her to die just because she hasn't enough money to pay their
> extortionate bills, is naked murder. We should be willing to descend to
> "bad form" to uphold that position. I'm not saying that because I
> calculate the terminal-health-care issue is one opponents of the
> far-Right can use to boost our polls, but because matters like this are
> precisely the Left's reason to exist.\
What we are up against is the residue of the Cold War. For decades
anything that smacked of socialism (i.e. universal health care, welfare,
etc) has been eyed with suspicion as part of the "slippery slope"
towards communism. As wartime propaganda maybe this had it's place, but
now it is just irrational. Unfortunately, the Cold war went on for so
long that people have forgotten that it was initially propaganda. Now
our leaders themselves even believe it. We need realize that and get
over it because there are some things that are just too important to
leave in the hands of profiteers. They have repeatedly shown themselves
to be capable of endangering the lives of others for the sake of a few
bucks. The most successful nations with regard to life expectancy,
education, infant mortality, etc, are the nations that have a mix of
social and free-market approaches to their economies.
>
> Yours WDK - WKiernan at ij.net
Gary Williams