Terri Schiavo

2005-3-23 05:34:00

I thought I would give a few comments about the Terri Schiavo situation since a reasonable amount of philosophy is coming into play.

Unless you've been on another planet you are probably aware that Terri has been in a near vegetative state over the past fifteen years... Her husband wants to pull the plug on her and let her starve to death and the parents want her life preserved at all costs.

To make matters more complicated some believe that Terri's condition was due to foul play from her husband. This is another issue though so let us put it aside for the sake of this discussion.

The battle between the husband and the parents has caught the national eye which has expanded the battle to include millions of conservatives against millions of liberals.

Which side is correct?

In my view neither is. Both sides are illusionary in their thinking, especially in their views of death which is seen as the most terrible thing in the universe.

In reality death is the closing of one door and the opening of another. There are many things worse than death. This is a simple statement, but one that needs to be incorporated into mankind's thinking.

Let's us first look at the liberal view on this. They basically believe that when one is in a no win health situation that a person should be able to be taken off life support.

In the case of Terri Schiavo this means letting her starve to death over a period that could last a month or more.

A while back I heard a person interviewed who the authorities attempted to put to death in this manner. After a few weeks of starving her loved ones were able to reverse the decision and a short time later she miraculously recovered. After recovering she said that she was not a vegetable as the authorities assumed and that the attempt to starve her to death was a living hell.

Now, no one knows for sure if Terri Schiavo has enough consciousness left to register the living hell of starving to death, but there is a good chance she is consciously suffering at this time.

The question is this. Why in the world do the authorities pick this obscene method of putting a person to death when it would be much more merciful to put a stake in her heart or to cut her head off? Anything quick makes much more sense than a painful month of starvation.

The reason for this illogical process is that the laws of the land would condemn anyone for murder who assisted in any way with her death. The logic behind the law is that if you do nothing and just let a person starve to death in agony you are innocent.

Pretty ridiculous, isn't it?

Now the conservative believe is that physical life is a gift from God and must be preserved at all costs. They seem to think that being in horrific pain or discomfort for 10-20 years is much better than death. The main thing is to just stay alive.

This thinking doesn't say much for their view of heaven. If heaven is so good then why the need to stay here in great pain when pulling the plug will take us to great bliss?

There is another thing to consider. When Jesus had enough of suffering on the cross he pulled the plug on himself and bailed from the no win situation. "Receive my spirit," he said as he left the scene of torture.

Now if it was all right for Jesus to vacate a bad situation after less than one day of torture then why would we condemn Terri Schiavo or family for releasing her after 15 years of suffering?

Where is the harm so long as the patient is not tortured to death with the slow death of starvation?

A good example of how this can be done right, with mercy, is given in the movie Million Dollar Baby.

It's a great movie and if you have not seen it yet, you will not be disappointed.

When we lose one we love, our bitterest tears are called forth by the memory of hours when we loved not enough. Maurice Maeterlinck (1862 - 1949),