zer0netgain wrote:
ChrisVulcan wrote:
I advise everyone on this forum: don't buy into the "Quality of Life" argument. It was devised as an excuse to take the lives of undesirables, invented by people who see themselves as superior to the rest of the world. (i.e., professors who thought they had more right to live than a mentally ret*d person, a German who thought he/she was superior to a Jew, an able-bodied person who thought he/she was superior to a disabled person, etc.)
Maybe so, but I can assure you that life is a balance between "quality" and "quantity."
I have an advance medical directive so that if I'm in a condition where I'm not likely to recover, I don't want doctors trying to save me.
Likewise, if I reach a point where the trial of trying to live day to day makes life itself practically unbearable, I'd prefer to not be alive.
Mere existence IS NOT sufficient cause to go on living.
Knowing a child will have a mere shadow of a life because of something you can't fix makes you wonder how humane it is to bring such a child into the world.
I'm a Christian, so I believe in a deity that is personally involved in the workings of the universe. I have often wondered if it would be right or wrong just to let someone go if they are close to dying, or in extreme cases like people in vegetative states. I concluded that if God (or the universe or whatever the reader of this post believes to be in charge) wanted that person to die on that date, it would have set up events so that he or she would just die. Therefore, in the case of a vegetative state, for example, the person has a reason for still being alive in a vegetative state. I believe that a life that would seem to have a purpose in continuing, however obscure to us, shouldn't be terminated.
_________________
Well, I was on my way to this gay gypsy bar mitzvah for the disabled when I suddenly thought, "Gosh, the Third Reich's a bit rubbish. I think I'll kill the Fuhrer." Who's with me?
Watch Doctor Who!