shotbanner.jpeg

March 29, 2005

Curb Your Enthusiasm

For the last couple of days, the left has been all atwitter about the case of Tom DeLay's father. "Hypocrisy", they giggle as they grin like toddlers that just made a good pants.

Two crucial differences:

  1. The senior DeLay was on a ventilator, unable to breathe on his own.
  2. There was apparently no dispute in the family about the senior DeLay's wishes in the event, even without a living will. There is obviously a dispute among the family in Ms. Schiavo's case.
Do yourselves a favor. Drop it.

Posted by Mitch at March 29, 2005 07:34 AM | TrackBack
Comments

SO, WHAT IS YOUR REACTION TO MY LIVING WILL AND WILL YOU COMPLY WITH MY WISHES?

Posted by: Mom at March 29, 2005 11:10 AM

As long as you swear you'll never, ever make tuna noodle casserole again.

Posted by: mitch at March 29, 2005 11:30 AM

Aaaah, the search for "hypocrisy," i.e. any hint of apparent inconsistency - usually demonstrating an unwillingness to address uncomfortable realities in the current discussion or a lack of understanding thereof or both.

Posted by: Brian Jones at March 29, 2005 11:48 AM

A Living Will is no panacea either because there are those who will not enforce it or who may not know it exists. It's just a guide, but it's a good guide to have.

Posted by: Eracus at March 29, 2005 12:23 PM

Mitch, there’s a third one:

3) Delay’s father’s condition was deteriorating and he died 27 days after the accident while Shiavo was arguably stable and lived for some 15 years.

Keep in mind, I’m on record as opposing federal intervention in this case and believe that the courts have been correct in upholding Florida law. However I recognize that there are enough significant differences between the cases of Charles Delay and Teri Schiavo that a reasonable and honorable person could say “yes, it’s okay to end life-prolong procedures when the entire family agrees, when the injuries are more severe, and when the patient’s condition is steadily deteriorating” but “no, it’s not okay to end life-prolonging procedures when the patient is stable enough to live for fifteen years and some members of the family are willing and able to care for her.”

Again, I think that Majority Leader Delay and the others who tried to intervene in what is a State issue were wrong from a constitutional and legal perspective but I’m not about to smear them with a false charge of “hypocrisy” particularly when it is not warranted.


Posted by: Thorley Winston at March 29, 2005 02:26 PM

Your Mom must make one awful tuna casserole. I love my Mom's. (Though, sadly, she can't cook anymore. On the bright side, my sister, a former Marine cook who lives with her and cares for her, is willing to take orders from her.)

I believe that the moral position is that, when a person isn't in a position to speak for himself on the question of whether they should live on or die, that anyone willing to take on the chore of maintaining a comfortable existence (as they understand it) for them MUST be allowed to do so.

And anyone who decides that person would be better off dead abrogates their position of authority.

I speak as a man who was asked by his father, when he was dying of cancer, to kill him.

I wasn't willing to go to jail for that. And I feel some shame over it.

Posted by: Old Whig at March 29, 2005 11:44 PM

Discount Pet Meds - Good site for discount pet meds - http://www.discountpetmeds.info

Posted by: Discount Pet Meds at December 5, 2005 10:05 AM

Hehe! Good work! -ipod nano
ipod nano

Posted by: ipod nano at March 31, 2006 05:55 PM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?
hi