First Musing

I thought this up yesterday. (Anything inaccurate, point out. It'll help me learn. )

I was reading "Shadow of the Hegemon" by Orson Scott Card, and the book dealt with a lot ethics, politic-wise. (Surprising for a science-fiction book. Well, surprising to me, anyway....)

It was either that or something that brought to my mind the purpose of humans in society and the community. Actually, the way people are treated. If an individual doesn't contribute to the community (good or bad depends on the community's priority), then it makes sense that the community will not treat that person with "respect", something earned nowadays. It seems as though they are unworthy. Through that thinking, then yes, it seems they aren't.

Then I got to thinking of people who can't help not contributing. Disabled. Immediately I thought of handicapped people (I'm thinking disabled from birth, since if a person was disabled later in life they might've had a chance to prove their uniqueness/contributions/etc etc. Less likely the younger a person is.)

Then a question that occurred to me, while I was in that mindset: Why would we as a community keep that person around? Would they even be considered a person?

Since disabled people are still considered people in the community (I guess leaving the birth canal is enough), then yes those that are disabled are considered people. (Compassion and pity might also color that sentiment.)

As for keeping them around...well, going to a Catholic school for my whole life has its perks, and I know a little about euthanasia. (That's something that is definitely barring a way to get rid of disabled people.)

Being Catholic, I oppose euthanasia since I don't believe I have the right to decide who gets to stay and who gets to leave this reality. (This goes for the death penalty, but that is a bit trickier. Perhaps another post).

The people who oppose euthanasia at the moment, not all of them are Catholic, or Christian. I suppose it's the monstrosity of it (destroying life, even in terms of relief, is a pretty drastic thing.) Perhaps people fear the chaos that can result from making such choices.

People in support of euthanasia say that an individual would like to leave. They might be in pain, and it's our duty to relieve them of that.

In some cases, that pain is chronic and horrible. But what about mentality? (Y'know, suicidal last year and okay this year.) Healing takes time. Ending people's lives robs them of their time and life. They lost their chance to get better. (Not to mention, from an unsympathetic viewpoint, euthansia seems cowardly, and unfair to those who still have to trudge through life's pains but don't get a government-endorsed ticket out.)

And Death Dealers can never know the person well enough to address and appraise the person's condition. People themselves don't even know themselves that well.

See, if we do go ahead with euthanasia, it will probably be on the people who ask for it (For Catholics, it's morally acceptable if the person had expressed beforehand, in writing, the condition/limit for termination of life.) However, for the incoherent, the vegetables...well, quite frankly the line gets blurry. Usually such decisions that influence the person would be up to the family, or whoever was around and was designated care to.

Stretch it even farther out. Would the people be in charge of the government enough to say when is when? Or would the people, who make up the nations, begin to change mentality? Would the outcasts of the national community begin to be seen as "Useless" and "non-contributive", and lose the right to live?

I bet plenty of books have been written of this, both hypothetical and probably fiction to comment on this question.

After thinking this through, I can see now why people would rather not deal with this. They fear the consequences that can result, which are pretty far-reaching. So they'd rather not start down the road. (A few states already have, but I'm talking nationally...and that's tough to get without a common mentality.)

I'm not sure how long the current, still-resisting mentality will last, since I am incapable of estimating what the heck the United States is like. (In "Shadows of the Hegemon", there was some pretty hilarious commentary on America that I found so true. Startling, really, to have it in my face like that.) The diversity is a blessing and a curse.

I just hope we as a nation never get to that stage, where the right to life is viewed so objectively. I hope people who don't believe in religion or fate aren't so arrogant enough to think that they arrived where they are--born--because of their doing (they'd have to be talking of past lives, which is a belief). That's the key question on whether to deal life or death. Do we have the right?

And who says?

That's up to you.