22 March 2005
A question of life and death

Mark Steyn in the Telegraph:

In practice, a culture that thinks Terri Schiavo’s life in Florida or the cleft-lipped baby’s in Herefordshire has no value winds up ascribing no value to life in general.

Is that true?

PermalinkFeedback (2)Default


  1. Sounds like BS.

    Posted by DAVID M SUCHER on 28 March 2005 at 12:10am

  2. Well if death is better than suffering, shouldn’t all severely disabled babies be killed, by law? And why do terminal cancer patients bother with life-prolonging chemo? And why do we give a toss when people we know kick the bucket, if they were sick or miserable anyway?

    Is life in general *inherently* worth something, or is it only valuable when it is demonstrably enjoyable? Terri Schiavo and the cleft-lipped baby had no choice, and there was no evidence they were in definite great suffering.

    So the argument they should die gives death the benefit of the doubt, rather than life, which does actually amount to not valuing life in general, for itself. It says the value of life is only as great as the owner’s demonstration of their desire to possess it. In other words, happiness, not life, is valuable, and life is only valuable insofar as it is a necessary pre-requisite for enjoyment.

    Posted by Alice on 28 March 2005 at 01:48am

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.