Quote:
Originally posted by: Mavdog
From your "slippery slope" argument you must feel that 1) people do not have the right to decide their own death, and 2) the court did not follow the law in their decisions. That in itself is a slippery slope that I don't wish to see. We do have the right to make the decision of being maintained artifically and we should respect the rule of law. I'm surprised that you disagree on both of these.
|
Wrong. I feel that one person shouldn't decide when it's time for another one to die.
If you had been paying attention to my comments on this subject, you'd know that I believe that the law as it stands in Florida (and Texas) should be changed. I said right up front that the judge acted within the rule of law. That doesn't mean that I think what he did, or more importantly, what the law allowed he and Michael Schiavo to do, is right.
When you move past written documents declaring a person's wishes or desires, you invariably move into a situation where other people are claiming to know what that person wanted or would have wanted. And that invariably leads to deciding whether the person should die or not. I don't think that's a decision that people should be empowered to make.
So yes, I believe that you should have the right to announce your desire, via a living will (advanced directive), that you don't want to be kept alive if you are in a persistent vegetative state. I don't believe someone else should have the right to make that decision for you (unless you give them that right, in writing).