Friday, April 01, 2005

Schiavo "Allowed to Die"

A photo caption on ABCNews.com reads:
Terri Schiavo died March 31, 2005, after 15 years in a vegetative state. She became the center of a national debate over whether she should be kept alive or allowed to die.
Isn't this a classic example of "liberal media bias"?

That Terri was "15 years in a vegetative state" is contested by many in the medical community. But that apparently doesn't matter to ABC News.

And the national debate was not over whether she should be "kept alive" or "allowed to die." It was whether she should continue to live or face starvation.

Terri was always "allowed to die." I'm allowed to die, too. We shouldn't fear losing this "right," because none of us will miss out. But when a society imposes starvation on another, that's not letting nature take its course. That's not being "allowed to die." It's being forced to die. And that is "murder."

I'll never see how eating is to be "kept alive," but starvation is to be "allowed to die."

God bless Terri Schiavo's soul, and may He stir all of ours to repentance.

4 comments:

Lisa said...

Hi, I'm also a convert to Catholicism, and I was also horrified at what was done to Terri Schiavo. Food and hydration are basic rights! Even our ailing Holy Father is receiving nutrition through a feeding tube. It bothers me so much when people refer to the Schiavo case as a "right to die" case. Didn't she also have the right to live?

DC said...

A "right to live"? You right-wing, Christian fundamentalist holy-roller bigot!

Sorry. Just kidding.

Thanks for your comment.

Anonymous said...

Hi Darren, why are the liberals always to blame? I consider myself a liberal, but I also think what the judge did was murder!!! Don't you think the publicans, [ republicans ], made political hay out of the whole thing? Bush could have done more to stop the starvation. I bet when Bush goes out of office, he will pardon Kinneyboy Lay!! I enjoy your blog, sometimes I agree, sometimes not.

DC said...

Hi anonymous,

I don't mean to paint all liberals with an anti-life brush.

I suppose one can be a fiscal or political liberal but be a social conservative. It's just much more common for liberals to support abortion on demand, homosexual marriage, the sterilization of religion in society, and a host of other "liberal" agendas.

But I realize not everyone falls into each one of those categories. Even Jesse Jackson, a big-time liberal, was fighting to prevent the murder of Terri Schiavo. That was great, even if he's wrong about everything else! :)

My "liberal media bias" comment was to highlight the frequently slanted presentation of hard news by much of the mainstream media. The slant seems always to go against conservative, traditional, mainstream values, though they act as if they're "fair and balanced."

I meant no offense in this post to morally principled yet otherwise liberal readers.