[ Post a Response | Inclusion Daily Express Discussion Board ]
Posted by Steven M. Busch
on March 14, 2005, 1:06 pm
65.61.101.59
The argument over euthanasia has become arbitrary on both sides. Proponents claim that Terri Schiavo’s life is not worth living in her present state, and that babies born with spina bifida should be euthanized because it is the merciful thing to do. Since when does someone’s arbitrary “opinion” constitute the “right” to make a life or death decision for another human being?
Unfortunately, most of the arguments offered by so-called “disability rights” proponents are equally arbitrary.
According to IDE, March 11, 2005….Douglas J. Sorocco, who has spina bifida and is chairman of the board of directors of the Spina Bifida Association of America, told the New York Times: “People with spina bifida are having families, and making a contribution to their communities…I would say I have a life worth living. My wife would say I have a life worth living. My family would say I have a life worth living."
Sorrocco’s line of defense is based on proving his worth to society, as if one’s ability to have a family or make a contribution to a community is the measure we ought to use to decide if a life is worth living or not. What about a person who can’t have a family, or doesn’t contribute to their community? Is it okay to kill that person?
The rule of law is paramount to the protection of human rights. I fear for our generation as we abandon laws based on the Judeo-Christian ethic and create new laws based merely on the whims of men. I’m saddened by the lack of understanding regarding the scope of this issue even among the so-called “disability rights” groups.
Message Thread:
« Back to thread