Originally posted by timothytsgsg:
And if we need more examples on why we shdn't let religious fundmentalists influence govt policy..here's one on Terri Schiavo- which the religious right Republican govt has overstepped their powers...
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050330/ap_on_re_us/brain_damaged_woman_37And PAS(Islamic Party in malaysia)
http://www.aliran.com/monthly/2003/6m.html
I don't know abt PAS, but I don't think that the action on Terri Schiavo is really anything wrong, apart from the demand to sieze her from hospital. And anyway, the action is only done by Governor Jeb Bush, not yet by the White House.I believe someone further down talked about how religious leaders "cloak their poor intentions in religious respectablity". Well, the same applies for secular leaders , or other secular "experts"., who cloak their poor intentions in moral and humanitarian and democratic respectability.
So euthanasia = "mercy killing"; we are killing someone to prevent that person from suffering agony. Remember the guy who jumped floors with his kids after he llost all his money at the casino? Presumably that guy was killing his kids to spare them future agony at their father's demise. So Common Sense tells you that this should be considered euthanasia as well, shouldn't it? But no, somehow we ahve nobody arguing for that. Instead what we ahve are many people calling that man sadistic and insane and etcetc. But when the doctors perform the act of authanasia, suddenly they are considered heroes, and defenders of Right of Choice.
It shocks me to see how Americans, a people that prides itself on promoting Human Rights around the world, can in the same breath condemn the Death Penalty and praise euthanasia. Euthanasia violates the most sacrosanct of all the Human Rights - the Right to Life. SO far there is no international HR organization that has thrown any backing behind Mr Schiavo, despite the fact that the Schiavo Case has stirred up even more media attention than Darfur and the Indonesian Quake combined, or the Abu Ghraib Massacres. Amnesty International, for example, has not written a single report or news-flash or urgent action request for people to support Mr Schiavo and have the feeding tube of Terri removed, the same way the organization does for people on the death row, or gays who are arrested for being who they are. AI still focuses on Sudan and the Death Penalty, and that is right. Essentially, there is no mercy involved in euthanasia; that is bland rhetoric, the same kind government leaders use when they talk about national catastrophes: hmmm... wonder why Microsoft donated so much more tsunami aid relief money than the British and American and Australian governments combined. It's simply a way for doctors to slack; it is medical negligence if the patient suffers while being kept alive, not the fault of God or those who want to keep the patients alive. besides, the key flaw in the argument for euthanasia is this: how can people in a state of extreme pain and suffering, or in a vegetative state like Terri Schiavo, be able to make a rational decision about their own lives? Their desire for death may be merely a suicidal impulse; in other words, euthanasia is essentially assisted suicide. ( no law court would accept the testimony of such a person) And what is assisted suicide? Isn't it murder?
Thus, for once, and once alone, the Republican Government may be right in their intervention.
And anyway, Mr Schiavo has vested interest in hospital money of his wife, so his defence of euthanasia is not merely out of altruistic concern for Terri.
Go read the New York Times, and you'll find out more.
the pikamaster (who opposes the Casino, the Death Penalty, Homosexual Discrimination, Abortion and Euthanasia)