The Terri Schiavo case has brought a phrase to the fore that has been used in the abortion debate for years: the culture of death. This phrase is used by pro-life advocates to describe those who support abortion, assisted suicide and the starvation death of Mrs. Schiavo. It’s appealing to use phraseology such as this because it creates a clear demarcation line between one side and the other. But it’s inaccurate, and not for the reasons you might believe.
Modern liberals and their fellow travelers in our society have become very good at redefining even the most basic points of any argument. Move away from life issues for a moment and take a look at poverty. The number of families living below the poverty line in the United States has risen in direct proportion to the illegitimacy rate. It’s simple math: one-parent homes do not, on average, earn the same income as two-parent homes. The logical solution, to most conservatives, is to encourage abstinence and marriage. But the liberals, who “care” more, dropped this idea on its head. First, they redefined illegitimacy and began calling is single parenthood in an attempt to remove the social stigma associated with having bastard children. Was this kind? Yes, it was. Did it solve any problems? No, it didn’t. The illegitimacy rate in the United States is still incredibly high and costs all of us more and more every year. All the liberal solution did was introduce some newspeak into the lexicon and make everyone feel better about themselves.
When attacked on the concept of single parenthood, liberals respond by saying that single parenthood should be respected as another lifestyle choice, just like marriage. Anyone who says otherwise is trying to push their morals on everyone else. It does not matter, apparently, that children from two-parent households tend to do better in school, are less likely to take drugs, have a lower suicide rate and are more likely to seek a higher education---the liberals made it an argument about me wanting you to live by my moral standards.
And so it is with life issues. Instead of admitting that abortion is murder of an unborn child and that they support it anyway, liberals have redefined what life is. Life, it would seem, is defined as any condition that you find comfortable and livable. Don’t want to see a child born into poverty? Abort it! After all, you wouldn’t want live that way, would you? So it is with Terri Schiavo: since you don’t want to live that way (or you wouldn’t want to deal with someone who does), kill her. Anyone who believes otherwise is a religious zealot. Do you think I’m overstating the case? Go cruising around the blogosphere for an hour and tell me I’m wrong.
Many in our nation talk about how divided we are. I agree. It is not issues which divide us, for the debate over issues small and large has always consumed this country. Our division comes from the fact that the argument is no longer made from a common ground of common belief and basic fact.
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.opaquelucidity.com/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/150
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Redefine:
» poker from poker
poker The most important scientific revolutions all include, as their only common feature, the dethronement of human arrogance from one pedestal [Read More]
» hand job from
my first sex teacher smoke on the water masturbating lesbian stories teen ... [Read More]
» Rape videos from Rape videos
Rape videos [Read More]
Your argument stands and I will agree with it as long as you are willing to apply the rule consistently. Say that anyone removed from life support is being killed. Remove a respirator and you are suffucating someone because you don't want to deal with it.
Posted by: Sly
at March 28, 2005 02:16 PM
That supposes that you consider tube-administered food and water to be life support. I can not agree. A respirator does the work of the lungs, which is are necessary organs. Someone who is only receiving food and water is functioning, but cannot feed himself.
Here's how I break it down (in a nutshell):
1. If you leave explicit, certified instructions as to how you want to be treated in the event you can no longer make decisions for yourself, those instructions should be followed to the letter.
2. If you don't leave instructions or if the instructions are vague, your primary relatives (spouse/children/parents) should have the right to reach a consensus on your treatment.
3. If your primary relatives are not in agreement or are estranged from the disabled person and court action is required, then the court should decide on the side of life. If this means respirator use indefinitely, then so be it.
The problem with all of this is that it is all but impossible to take every situation into account. However, if there is going to be court judgement on these cases, then there must be concrete guidelines and precedents.
Posted by: Matt_D
at March 28, 2005 03:23 PM
And, Peter, even though I disagree with you, I know that you are thinking in compassionate terms. I can't say that I think that of everyone whose blogs I read.
Posted by: Matt_D
at March 28, 2005 03:24 PM
It is a terrible situation. I feel the spouse should decide. If the spouse wants input that is great. However, it is hard to get family members to decide what the weather is at any given time. At least it is in my family. Partly Cloudy or Mostly Sunny. Partly Sunny or Mostly Cloudy. I admit that I do not know alot of the facts in Terri's case. Alot of people I have talked to, seem to think the husband is guilty of some crime and will be charged with something after his wife's death. For the record IMO he should have allowed her to have the communion wafer and the wine. Why he allowed just the wine.......I will take a guess at reading his mind,(since so many others have already, what's one more..) I bet his lawyer advised against the wafer. Probably some crap it would give the parents a chance in court. For GOD'S SAKE let her have a damn communion wafer!
Posted by: Sly
at March 28, 2005 04:52 PM
the parents have no say in the matter. They gave her away at the wedding to the husband. People are painting this guy like a criminal. they have to do an autopsy if she gets cremated so we will find out if he did anything wrong, I guess.. Let's let her go already, like SHE wanted.....
Posted by: joe at March 29, 2005 09:33 PM