What should happen?
Posted 23 Mar, 2005 at 08:15 by blue in /World | Permanent link
Terri Schiavo.Her name has been in the media throughout the US, Canada and even the world.
Many people in Canada claim that such a battle could not occur here, where the religious right does not have as much power as it does in the states.
Many people claim that the majority of Americans support the justice ruling to remove the tube. Even though the President does not.
What do you claim?
There is a random sampling of people who read this and live in both the US and Canada.
Should Terri be kept alive artificially? Is she truely even still alive?
Should she be starved to death by removing the tube? What would she want?
What would you want?
Comments (3 comments so far)
In no particular order:
- What the vox populi thinks shouldn't matter. What the president thinks shouldn't matter. What I think shouldn't matter. Because neither I nor the masses nor Dubya himself are fully aware of all of the information in the case, nor equipped to pass judgement on the medical and legal arguments in play here.
- That being said, the Congress' last-minute attempt to throw this to the federal courts (which, so far, haven't exactly been co-operative with the Republicans' intentions) was cynical and dangerous, not to mention hypocritical. Rhetoric about a "culture of life" would be more believable if it wasn't coming from a party that supports the death penalty and wars of aggression.
- Much has been made of the fact that the woman's family is Catholic. Catholic doctrine on this point is actually fairly clear: a person has every right to refuse extreme methods to prolong life. To believe otherwise would be to lose sight of the ephemeral nature of this life, valuing it above eternal life in the world beyond.
- I take issue with your use of the word "random" in this context, since the sampling of people who read this space is heavily biased towards the authors and their friends. Talk about your bad sampling methods... :)
This whole mess feels like gossip to me. Does it really need to be reported on?
What really gets me is the involvement of congress into the conflict (regardless of which side it is on). There is still more suffering in india/asia from the tsunami and they didn't invest this amount of manpower initially into that. It took public scorn to get them more involved. It lends the appearance that when decisions on life threaten their inner held beliefs they act, but an "Act of God" really doesn't warrant the same investment. Posted 2005/3/28 07:56:40 by Brent
What really gets me is the involvement of congress into the conflict (regardless of which side it is on). There is still more suffering in india/asia from the tsunami and they didn't invest this amount of manpower initially into that. It took public scorn to get them more involved. It lends the appearance that when decisions on life threaten their inner held beliefs they act, but an "Act of God" really doesn't warrant the same investment. Posted 2005/3/28 07:56:40 by Brent
John Stewart did an awesome little piece on the Daily Show about the media circus that has been surrounding something which should be a private issue. Politics is all about jumping on bandwagons...some people need to find better bandwagons.
Posted 2005/3/31 12:36:40 by
wendy