Quote:
Originally Posted by PJO34";p="
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liberty";p="
Quote:
Originally Posted by PJO34";p="
If she had wanted to live as long as possible using all available and future means to perpetuate that "life," her decision would be terribly selfish and cowardly.
|
Not if her parents were willing to take care of her. |
But that's the point: it is unfair to leave that decision in her parents hands. If her parents had their way, she would still be alive and their every moment would be devoted to her. And since she is younger, it could have destroyed the rest of her parent's lives.
This way, her parents will mourn for a time and then they will start to re-discover that they are still alive (which would probably never be possible without Terri's life acting as an anchor to theirs).
Obviously, I don't know these people and this is nothing more than my opinion (no facts here), but I believe that a person who forces his or her next of kin to make these terrible decisions is, at best, irresponsible; and if that person decides that he or she wants to cowardly depend on doctors to give the mere appearance of life, that is -- again in my opinion -- despicable and selfish. |
I agree with you that it could be a good thing for parents to move on, the problem I have is with the "ought to be regarded with the greatest contempt of mankind" part. Whatever situation Terri and her parents set up is not my business, and certainly not worthly of my scorn or derision. The Pope has stated that he would choose to remain on life support. I think that is a personal, religious decision and don't believe mankind should despise him for it.
I think there is a difference between suggesting a person should feel shame for a decision, vs. mankind should regard that decision with contempt. If he had claimed the former, I would not have challenged the idea.
03-31-2005, 03:17 PM
.
Linear Mode
