Federal Court to Hear Schiavo Case Today (washingtonpost.com)
Federal Court to Hear Schiavo Case Today (washingtonpost.com)
I had two very interesting conversations about this case yesterday; and they were both pre-mature. I say this in the sense that, before I had learned much about the case, I had made my decision. I was on the side of the husband: She has suffered enough, take the feeding tube out.
I was talking with my sister in the first conversation. We had talked about it a little back and forth and both talked about how we would not want to be kept alive if we were in that condition. For 15 years this family has had to deal with the hope of something that may never come. On top of that they have had to deal with the disagreement with whether Terri should have her feeding tube removed or not. This woman is only alive because of technology. What if it was her time to pass when she had her accident, but we intervened and kept her "alive" if you can even call that a life?
Later that day I discussed it briefly with another friend, and she make the argument that we are not in a position to "play God" by having the feeding tube removed. I argued that God was sovereign enough to keep her alive if it was His will even with the feeding tube removed. She argued that if we allow something like this to go through, that opens the door to being OK with abortion and euthanasia. Our conversation was interrupted by some other friends so we didn't finish, but it got me thinking.
This morning I read the article quoted above and President Bush said it so clearly: "I will continue to stand on the side of those defending life..." This should be black and white: we should defend life.
Voting 203 to 58 at 12:42 a.m., the House joined the Senate in approving the measure and rushing it to Bush. He signed the bill into law at 1:11 a.m., saying, "I will continue to stand on the side of those defending life for all Americans, including those with disabilities."
I had two very interesting conversations about this case yesterday; and they were both pre-mature. I say this in the sense that, before I had learned much about the case, I had made my decision. I was on the side of the husband: She has suffered enough, take the feeding tube out.
I was talking with my sister in the first conversation. We had talked about it a little back and forth and both talked about how we would not want to be kept alive if we were in that condition. For 15 years this family has had to deal with the hope of something that may never come. On top of that they have had to deal with the disagreement with whether Terri should have her feeding tube removed or not. This woman is only alive because of technology. What if it was her time to pass when she had her accident, but we intervened and kept her "alive" if you can even call that a life?
Later that day I discussed it briefly with another friend, and she make the argument that we are not in a position to "play God" by having the feeding tube removed. I argued that God was sovereign enough to keep her alive if it was His will even with the feeding tube removed. She argued that if we allow something like this to go through, that opens the door to being OK with abortion and euthanasia. Our conversation was interrupted by some other friends so we didn't finish, but it got me thinking.
This morning I read the article quoted above and President Bush said it so clearly: "I will continue to stand on the side of those defending life..." This should be black and white: we should defend life.
