I woke up this morning (after wearing shorts around campus yesterday) to find the world blanketed in a wonderful layer of cool, pure snow. It’s still snowing, and I guess it’s going to keep snowing. And that makes me quite happy.
So now I’m sitting in my history of Rome class, waiting for things to get started. I didn’t do the reading, nor did I do the reading for my Asian history class that I have next, and I haven’t done the reading for my film class this afternoon. As a matter of fact, I really haven’t done any homework since my marathon before spring break. Whoo! (this is going to hurt later!)
So it’s been a couple days. True. What’s new? Good question, really. I’m quite glad to be back. Obviously I’m not yet back into the swing of school yet, but that’s quite alright by me.
Ken’s twin brother Keith is visiting for a few days. For the record, I kicked his ass at Smash last night. As a matter of fact, I beat Bovard by a good margin as well, and decided to quit before Andrew started playing, such that I had an undefeated night. Quit while you’re ahead. It’s a good policy.
This Teri Shiavo case really has my panties in a knot (*ahem* –that’s a figure of speech, of course). There’s so many layers of violation and stupidity– I’m quite sure I’ve only grasped a few of the many. But here’s my complaints:
Although not really an “assisted suicide” case, it does completely fall under the spectrum of the “right to die,” and if Shiavo is allowed to die, then it may well serve as a precedent to allow for legal assisted suicides and the like in the future.
1) We’ve given a right to live. Or are we? Are we forced to live? Shouldn’t we also be granted the right to die? If you told your husband that you would not want to live as a vegetable for fourteen years, wouldn’t you want your wishes to be granted?
By this I mean to point out that the national government is attempting to actively deny both Shiavo and the rest of the American population of a right to die. Without the right to die, there truly can be no right to live, but rather a mandate of life. You were conceived, and because your mother didn’t attempt the abortion by the correct date, you were legally bound to be brought into the world, and now that you’re in the world you’re legally bound to live in this world until you exhausted the resources of modern medicine and science. And you don’t have a choice.
Just thinking about that makes me feel claustrophobic– as though I’m in a cage or jail cell, and there’s no way out.
Of course I suppose its necessary– if people were killing themselves, the effect on our society’s moral would be devastating.
2) This is a very personal family matter. What the hell is this doing on every national broadcast and on the front page of every regional publication– newspapers, magazines, soon to be books, no doubt… What the hell is it doing on my blog? What a gross invasion of privacy that these family issues have become national issues that have become party issues that are well known to the majority of Americans.
3) On a more personal level… for the love of god, let the woman die for the love of the living. There’s no doubt that the last fourteen years of Shiavo’s life have been a living hell– he’s handcuffed to his wife’s hospital bed. He can’t move on. He can’t forget. He can’t go off and enjoy a well-earned vaction. He’s tied. His family is tied. They can’t enter the mourning process and move on with their lives so long as Shiavo is, technically, “living.”
4) Speaking of living… a line must be drawn somewhere? Sure, her biological processes function. Her heart pumps. Her stomach digests. Etc. But is that justification? There are no brain waves– no brain activity. No recognition, to happiness, no sadness, no hopes, dreams, aspirations, fears or thoughts. Right-wing conservative-Christians don’t try to stop me from turning my car off, but shouldn’t they? So long as I leave the key in, the engine turns. But life doesn’t consist of the presence of biological processes. Life is learning and experiencing and loving and losing and excitement boredom and tears and happiness and achievement… not the decomposition of glucose molecules 32 units of ATP that split into adenosine diphosphate and inorganic phosphate…
I dunno. Obviously. No one does. But it seems pretty clear to me that the federal government is far overstepping its grounds. Our government should exist to perform governmental functions–international relations, establishing trade policy, maintaining order, building roads, funding fire stations and other issues of government. But the function and role of government should not be to dictate the flow and functions of our daily lives. It should not be to unduly deny us of our basic human rights, especially on grounds of “moral judgment.” I’m an advocate of the separation of church and state. Let the church govern morality among its constituents. And let the state govern the function and purposes of the state. It is not the state’s place to put morally judge abortions or gay marriage or a husband’s fulfillment of his wife’s request.
But, of course, what can we do? Apathetically accept the status quo, and take whatever decision the court passes down without cry or protest? And if we protest? What then? Will our voice be heard? Of course not. Do we really have any say in governance? No, not really. The senators will decide what seems right to them, and Bush will allow or disallow it. If we had voted differently, Kerry would do the same–and who’s to stop him?
And, of course, is it even worth stopping? Even if we truly have no say in government, what of it? Does it matter? If they can keep us happy and sedated–lord knows that our quality of life in the United States is among the best in the world–then does it make the least bit of difference if the commoner has a voice in government? Would you stand up against the current system? Do I?
…
In other news, I was thinking about going skiing on Friday, but then I realized that I had signed up to cover a couple shifts. But I think I’ll go skiing on Saturday, so long as the snow keeps up. It will probably be the last opportunity of the season, and, well, I had better take advantage of it.
First of all, it is ok to admit you wear panties. It is ok to have a feminine side Mark, maybe not that feminine, but you can work on that. As for your comments on the Teri Shiavo case, I agree, government has its place, but deciding whether some one lives or dies is not it. I, however find the press more offensive then the government. It is just sickening how they are treating this. All to get ratings, well they can go to hell! Anyway, thems my thoughts. Peace out Mark, and I hope you enjoy sking