The Good Professor weighs in on the Schiavo case:
Well pardon a Bunyip being frank, but this business isn’t about compassion. It’s about control — control of both the individual and society’s direction. As so many advocates of slow starvation are now demonstrating, they believe the common good means bowing to their definition of it — and dying for it, too, when the more enlightened ordain it timely and appropriate.
They can’t win elections and the bombast of their sermons is largely ignored outside the universities and broadsheets, but the mob that knows what’s best for the rest of us, every one of us, has finally found someone on whom, at long last, it can impose its will. That Schiavo’s parents will be harrowed, well their pain is inconsequential. As the Irving admirer might have noted, control is about being heeded and obeyed. It’s hard to imagine stooping much lower than the depths so many determined tube-pullers are now plumbing, but if the advocates of death-when-convenient get their way in Florida, you can bet they soon will scramble for an even lower rung. Fact is, they can hardly wait to stretch their compassion one again.
What has staggered me about this case is that no one seems to mind that Schiavo’s parents wishes about the welfare of their child are being overruled. Granted, this is an adult child, but even still, this seems to be… I mean, please. Where, indeed is the compassion?
I find it bizzare and grotesque that in a situation where the family is deciding whether or not Terri lives or dies that the parents wishes to keep their daughter alive can be over-ruled. And I also find it abhorrent that the method used to end Terri’s life. Starvation? Is this humane? They say she can feel no pain. I hope they are right!
Fifteen years ago this would have been unthinkable. Where are we going to be fiteen years hence? And who decides? The Bunyip asks some good questions.