THE BRUTALITY OF COMMON SENSE

So for month, upon month and year upon year, those that have our “best interest” at heart have been telling us that euthanasia is the only answer, keeping people artificially alive is a) wrong, b) too expensive, c) inhumane, etc., etc. On the another side, some say, let nature take its’ course.  Allow for the dignity in quietly passing, and still others say all things should be employed to sustain life no matter what.

And in the midst of this debate, I must admit that my own thoughts and feelings have fluctuated.  I suppose that’s as it should be.  After all, this is a major decision for our society! Should we be the arbiters of life and death? Should we allow for euthanasia? And if we do, what are the circumstances we will use to employ this solution? Then, how can we regulate the practice? CAN we even regulate?

Without question, the entire topic presents us with a slippery slope, fraught with personal, religious, practical and medical considerations that make nearly any type of consensus an impossibility.

I have been and will probably remain on the side of; “it’s a personal individual decision” at best, or a “family” decision where the individual is not physically able to decide. And then the decision is agreed upon by all relations. That seemed to make sense to me, until this morning.

For those of you that are old enough to remember “Rosanna Rosanna Danna”; she was a character created by Gilda Radner who appeared on Laugh In during its’ hey day! Her character Rosanna Rosanna Danna was a hilarious creation! And as it would happen, this morning I read something that brought that character to mind. She would always say: “It’s always something”!!!  (I include a brief sample of Gilda’s work – she was brilliant in my view. What do you think?

http://youtu.be/Z7gLJr03vNQ

I use Rosanna’s back and forth struggle to show, that after I have thought long and deep on the issue of euthanasia, back and forth, back and forth; I decided on my position on this issue. Then, this morning while reading a post from a contemporary, who also blogs at WordPress, while buzzing along with my firmly made up mind I screeched to a halt.  This, while reading a post from Dan Mitchel (who authors one of the blogs that I find an intelligent and even-handed discussion of issues).

It’s a gift he seems to have. A certain way of presenting the facts, without your having to get the feeling that he is trying to change your mind. Of course, some of his work does change your mind, but you still have the satisfaction of coming to the conclusions on your own without the hard sell. His topic was not a piece on should we or shouldn’t we, but rather a quiet discussion of England and its government run health care.  And the brutality of the system.

As a result of my reading his piece, I have determined to fight Obamacare with new resolve!!

You can find my inspiration at: Daniel Mitchell

Advertisements

THE BILL OF RIGHTS –

Call me a stickler, but I believe that the “Bill of Rights” was meant for everyone, and it’s especially for those with whom the majority may disagree. So, for the record, below is the short version: (click on “Bill of Rights” to get the full text!)

1.    FREEDOM OF RELIGION

2.    RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS

3.    CONDITIONS FOR QUARTERS OF SOLDIERS

4.    RIGHT OF SEARCH AND SEIZURE REGULATED

5.    RIGHT TO FAIR TRIAL

6.    RIGHT TO A SPEEDY TRIAL

7.    RIGHT TO A TRIAL BY JURY

8.    EXCESSIVE BAIL, CRUEL PUNISHMENT

9.    RULE OF CONSTRUCTION OF CONSTITUTION

10.  RIGHT OF THE STATES TO PETITION GOVERNMENT

Having enumerated those rights above, I must say that as of late there have been seeing comments appearing across a variety of blogs and posts on the internet that question the rights of others that are writing and posting on the internet things with which they disagree.

Could anything posted on the internet be more dangerous than those who want to take away another authors right to post? Of course that would probably be close to impossible, but the very idea is alarming! Disagreement and debate is a necessary activity of a free people! And the internet has allowed peoples all over the globe to read and learn about the rights of others. So we must exercise CAUTION, and WISDOM, as if the rights of one person are threatened, it affects the rights of ALL people! So suggesting, even thinking of quashing debate…is a very, very slippery slope. As, who will decide what is acceptable and unacceptable?

Without a doubt, I believe that the situation we currently find ourselves in is exactly what our Forefathers had in mind when they wrote and adopted that venerated document  the BILL OF RIGHTS!

It is a double edged sword for us to proclaim freedom for ourselves and for those who agree with us, but leave out those that don’t have similar beliefs. This is certainly NOT freedom and especially not religious freedom! Are we Christians so insecure in our personal beliefs that we feel we have to control those that don’t share our beliefs?

I certainly hope not!!