Tuesday, January 27, 2015
The value of life
The reply to “the value of life”, said,(paraphrased); abortion is
better than troubled children and later societal expense.
Let’s take this view a bit further and include all segments
of the population that become an expense or burden on society.
The elderly- euthanasia at failing assessment, problem solved.
The disabled- same assessment fail-death scenario
All dysfunctional addicts (gamblers, alcoholics, drugs…)-same
Catastrophically injured requiring major long term
rehabilitation and expense with reduced quality of life
Who has the loudest voice? It is the most helpless that have,
No Voice, who are singled out, first, for no right to life.
As in nature, the weakest are first to succumb to attack.
There are few weaker than the unseen, silent, moving, feeling,
infant in the womb of their protector.
I suppose next would be the vegetative individual, then the
frail fragile elderly, if they do not first succumb to the
pharmaceutical treatments,(my opinion).
In prison, the extremely mean-violent live long with appeals.
Surely, appealing for the infant and it’s fight for a
humane death is of equal importance? (sick, isn’t it?)
The infant should be protected above all, because it has no
voice, and has been relegated to fetal tissue status by those
who speak in place of it’s silent screams.
The prisoner, no matter how apparently worthless, has a
lawyer and advocates. At times, he/she is truly innocent and
framed. Too often, he/she is guilty and lives long.
I think the point of the original poster is life value cannot be
accurately measured in dollars or defined by best effort
My point is this:
It is impossible to assess accurately who may
survive and prosper past tumultuous life events.
Condemn Carefully, it is dangerous ground