| It facinates me the popular fight for life against all odds. It is far beyond debating with in what terms life is. Ok, a cell is life sure, a vegitised cancer patient is still alive. Fight for that if you so wish. But fighing for a right to life is a strange one when death is left out of the eqation as it is an equal and entire important part of life. All life dies, its nature. If i was in an era before our technoligy capable of reproducing basic bodily functions, a fatal injurie or disease would be just that, fatal. But now we enter the poor delema of people acting as a flesh bags run by machines when struck by terrible mentally and physically erroding diseases. If the have such a vivid right to life, where is the option of death? Its no longer in there hands if they cant communicate, and so they act as a platform of moral debate that letting her die is vial murder and is the same as killing a perfectly fit and conciously active person. The termaninal body lies motionless with a suffering in the mind nobody cared to mention. Nobody on the life crusade anyway. From what i seen in these debates gone by, the majority of humans say a lot before theve really though about quality of life rather than plain old life. Life is a versatile thing, the human psyhc is defiantly not in comparison. I know your all talking about killing babies but this is all completely relavent. I couldnt think of a worse demise than limbo between life and death. I myself will make sure i have legal documents to cover myself if i ever came down with a terminal illness that if im no longer responive to destroy, as i am no longer living by my own concept. |