Those with common sense know when life begins... but when does life end?
Anyone who's read my site long enough knows how vehemently Pro-Life I am. There's no doubt in my mind that life is a precious gift given to us by a Heavenly Father and Mother to allow us the physical experience in our progression throughout eternity, with the purpose of exposing us to pleasure, pain, gain, and loss in order to steel our Spirits as ore is strengthened in the fire.
Even those children conceived under extraordinary circumstances are children to be nurtured and cared for so that they too have this opportunity to live, love, laugh, and cry... To what end is not up to us individually, each life is precious and distinctively their own to be experienced for only their purposes, purposes that cannot be fully understood by mortal minds... but only understood by the application of faith.
This being said, I have been reading about the
Supreme Court's 6-3 decision determining that a federal drug law does not override the 1997 Oregon law used to end the lives of more than 200 seriously ill people. When put against the backdrop of the Terri Schiavo disaster that occurred last year, I don't think I disagree with the court's decision.
Not to say that Terri should have had her feeding tube removed!! That was a separate case but one that deals with the 'when does life end' question nonetheless. A question that has been on our minds a lot lately.
Is the Pro-Life stance the same when considering the end of a life as it is when considering the abortion of a fetus? (read: 'The Killing of a Baby') One would assume so...
But with much discussion between my wife and I over the last year about whether or not to be kept alive when terminally ill and in severe pain, I no longer think so. We both decided that we would not like extraordinary support to stay
living in that condition. And while we both expressed desires to just have bullets put in our head instead, I don't think that's legal. It is also probably a function of extreme selfishness as well, as is suicide itself- the ultimate in selfishness...
However, with the advancements in medical technology and medicine's ability to keep someone alive long after they're essentially dead, I cannot think of a more disturbing prospect than to be kept alive when there is no hope of experiencing life as I know it now.
Along those same lines, the slippery slope argument comes into effect as the 'when does life
end' argument gains momentum in one direction or the other with the possibility of moving beyond a morally acceptable limit.
It's a very touchy and personal situation and one that needs to be dealt with in very specific and legal terms when drawing up papers to deal with how you want the end of your life situation handled. If you have specific and legal documents outlining your intentions beforehand, I do not see the problem with assisted suicide for the terminally ill who are experiencing extreme suffering.
If the Supreme Court is going to sit there and defend a woman's right to choose whether or not a child is going to grow to experience life in her body, at least they're being consistent with this decision on assisted suicide; as if that's any justification!
In the interest of expanding my own perception on this issue, I'd like to know what you think.
Adam over at
Adam's Blog weighed in on this post:
What we're talking about in physician assisted suicide is actively working to destroy life that has become hard, difficult, or painful. While Peakah doesn't see the problem with allowing Assisted Suicide for the Terminally Ill, I do. It puts doctors in the position of a killers instead of healers. It destroys that idea, that most sacred charge of the physican, "First, do no harm."
As a matter of principle, it further ensconces a Culture of Death, where somehow we can decide what innocent life can be destroyed. When you think about our national first principles in the Declaration of Independence, the word inalienable is a synonym for unforfeitable. That means we can't rightly decide to actively kill ourselves or encourage others to do so.
Go there and read the rest of his well thought out arguement which I found myself agreeing with yet sticking to my guns at the same time...
There's more great analysis found at:
Unclaimed Territory and
MF Blog and
Whole Wheat Blogger and
Aaron's BlogOther opinions (let me know to add yours!):
Stop the ACLU,
Rob,
Political Dogs,
Blogs4God,
Lynchburg Area VA,
DemLog,
Stones Cry Out,
Daddypundit,
Baseball Crank,
RoblogAnd there's always
ScrappleFace's twist...
Linked as well (cuz I'm lovin tha linky-love) to today's open posts at: Don Surber, third world county, Jo's Cafe, Cao's Blog, NIF, Basil's Blog, TMH's Bacon Bits, Choose Life, Diane's Stuff, Stuck on Stupid, Rempelia Prime, MacStansbury, Right Wing Nation, Adam's Blog, Clear Lake Reflections)UPDATE: Be sure to check out the comment section on this one! Diane has engaged me in an awesome debate and D. Maria passionately expresses her views!! (I was hoping for this type of reaction!!) What are you waiting for! Let me know what you think!!
