Thoughts on the right to die

Several members of a right-to-die group known as the Final Exit Network have been arrested on charges of (surprise!) assisting suicide.  The debate on assisted suicide is often conflated with the abortion debate.  After all, just think of the language used: the right to life and the right to die.  And since I support the right to life, I must oppose the right-to-die activists.  But you know how the Justice Party works; I can’t leave a political stereotype untouched.

First of all, I want to clarify that I am not pro-suicide.  I have experienced the suicide of a cousin and seen the effect it had on the entire family.    Mind you, it wasn’t the “I have a terminal illness and want to pass away on my own terms” sort of suicide that the Final Exit network is advocating.  (Our pastor assured us that suicide is not condemned by the Bible, so I’m going to leave the religious aspects of this out of the post.)

I also had an aunt who, after losing her legs and suffering various other medical problems, decided to stop treatment and enter hospice.  She died naturally– no lethal drugs or similar measures– but in my mind it was along the lines of suicide because she made a conscious decision to die sooner rather than later.  Her death was much easier for the family to accept than my cousin’s, mostly because she had been deteriorating for so long and we all knew it was just a matter of time.  Would it have made a difference to me if my aunt had died a week earlier via assisted suicide?  Honestly, not really.  We all understood what her intentions were, and she had lived a long, fulfilling life.

Naturally, I believe that my cousin and aunt had the right to life.  But here’s the thing that distinguishes assisted suicide from abortion (or any other manner of human killing)- they chose to forfeit their own right to life.  They didn’t take away someone else’s rights, they stopped exercising their own.  The “right to die” is just the voluntary waiving of the right to life.

So here I am, the pro-lifer, having accepted the right to kill oneself, at least in theory.  In practice, there are a thousand other complications.  An old news article comes to mind, from Oregon, where assisted suicide is legal under some circumstances.  A woman received a letter from her insurer that said, in effect: “Sorry your cancer treatments haven’t worked.  We don’t cover the last-ditch treatment you need, but why don’t you take advantage of our lethal drug coverage?”  That kind of scenario is intolerable.  If we conceive of assisted suicide as giving up the right to life, every patient MUST have the resources to try to keep living.  There’s also the problem of protecting a physician’s right to not be involved in a suicide.

In the final analysis, here’s what I have to say.  You can give up your right to life by killing yourself.  That doesn’t mean that you should.  Think about your family and friends, and include them in your decision if possible.  Think about whether your pain can be alleviated by psychological or medical intervention.  But if you know that your time is near and want to spare yourself and your loved ones from a more gruesome, prolonged death, then I don’t see your suicide as selfish or morally wrong.

News Flash- The economy still sucks

Recent analysis suggests that Obama’s budget plan is likely to fall short, and economic recovery will take longer than expected.  But Obama can’t back down now.  If he does, the public will panic, and we’ll be in even more trouble.  I’m not a huge fan of government spending by any means, I just don’t see many other solutions.

Speaking of which, my cousin reports in her blog that it’s gotten so bad, one European airline is considering a charge to use the bathroom on flights.  (I’ll resist making a pun on “European.”)  I don’t see how this will make much revenue- the small quarters and uncertain cleanliness are already enough incentive for me to go before boarding.  And it doesn’t seem fair to exploit people in emergency situations.

I don’t care if you’re pro-life or pro-choice

Wherever you stand on abortion itself, it is wrong to force doctors to perform abortions.  The hypocrisy of those “pro-choice” groups who would take deny a physician’s right of conscience is just sickening.  And yet that is exactly what Obama is considering.

“But abortion is legal,” you say.  So is capital punishment, but there would be a huge outcry if doctors couldn’t refuse to administer an execution.  And while other federal legislation may theoretically preserve the right of conscience, that legislation is weak and poorly enforced.  Even Obama’s Health and Human Services administrator admits that “there might be a need to clarify existing laws.”  Unlike the other federal laws, the Bush clause also ensures that taxpayer money will not go to hospitals and clinics that violate physician conscience.

I have my own theory about why “pro-choice” groups want to take away physician choice; fewer and fewer medical students are entering the abortion practice.  They want conscripted service.  If that’s the case, they can go to hell.  My pre-med friends are working incredibly hard because they know that one day, they can save lives.  The abortion lobby has no right to deny a doctor’s life-giving call by forcing them to destroy life.

P.S.- I was discussing this with a pro-choice friend on facebook, who is concerned about the patient’s right to health care.  The Justice Party does agree that health care reform is in order.  But I don’t think that the right to health care extends so far as to be able to demand an aboriton from any ob/gyn.  The analogy I gave was this: I plan to become an adoption lawyer.  That puts me in the broader category of family law, which also includes divorce.  But no client can make me do his or her divorce, even though we all have the right to legal representation.  Similarly, if someone becomes an ob/gyn in order to treat STDs, or infertility, or whatever, that person can’t then be forced to do abortions just because it falls under the broader umbrella of medical services sought by women.

Capitol Punishment

Tomorrow night, the pro-life student organization at the University of Miami is screening Deadline, a documentary about an Illinois governor’s decision to commute all death sentences to life in prison.  The Justice Party opposes capitol punishment.  So I thought now would be a good time to address some common arguments.

Isn’t the death penalty in the Bible? Yes.  But ancient Israel was a theocracy, with divine authority supporting its criminal justice system.  Our justice system is made up of humans, and humans are fallible.  And even the Biblical system required at least two eyewitnesses in any death penalty case, which is more stringent than our guidelines.

Speaking of eyewitness testimony, is it reliable? Not at all.  Modern psychology has proven that eyewitness memory is much faultier than juries give it credit for.  Many inmates convicted on the basis of eyewitness evidence have been vindicated through DNA testing.

But doesn’t the death penalty deter future crime? No scientific studies have shown this to be the case.

Executions save us money- after all, keeping someone in prison for life is expensive. It actually costs far more to keep someone on death row, due to court appeals and other considerations.  And there is no way to measure the cost of possibly killing innocent people.

For more information about the death penalty, I recommend Death Penalty Focus.

Chimpanzee Mauls Owner

A Connecticut chimp has been shot dead after seriously wounding his owner.  There was no apparent provocation for his attack.  I don’t want to sound callous, but this just underscores the fact that chimpanzees should not be pets.  I understand that he was already domesticated, but I’m sure that plenty of qualified zoos would have been happy to take him.  This tragedy was 100% preventable.

“Rapelay” Cannot be More Tasteless

I am not easily offended, but whoever came up with the idea for this video game needs a good kick in the head.  I understand that there are plenty of violent, crime-glorifying titles out there, but rape is not a game, and watching “the tears glistening in the young girl’s eyes as the player attacks her in graphic detail” is NOT entertainment.  This is an insult to rape survivors in Japan and around the world, and I’m glad that Amazon.com has decided to remove it from its stock.

NAACP Centennial

I am really bad at this posting every day thing.

Congratulations to the NAACP on its 1ooth anniversary.  The civil rights movement has come a long way in those 100 years.  I’m not saying the job is done; their new focus is on economic equality, which I think is a good move in general.  Don’t agree with the specific request to put a nine-month freeze on foreclosures, as it seems to just be an attempt to delay the inevitable.  But fighting predatory lending is definitely something we can all get behind, and the long-term goals are admirable.

Sebelius and Darwin

Two news items today.  First, Kansas governor Kathleen Sebelius is being strongly considered for the position of Secretary of Health and Human Services.  According to PoliticalBase, she has experience dealing with health insurance companies, a big plus if Obama is planning drastic health care reform (although I don’t think he’ll get it).  She is also strongly pro-abortion and anti-capital punishment, a combination which, though common, never ceases to amaze me.

Second, Thursday is the 200th anniversary of Darwin’s birthday, which has set off a flurry of evolution vs creationism articles over the last few weeks.  The Justice Party position is that evolution should be taught in schools, simply because an understanding of evolutionary theory is necessary for some career fields- and after all, isn’t the point of school to prepare children for careers?  (My best friend since childhood, who is studying archaeology, thanks me for including this in the platform.)

Of course, there’s another layer to the debate, and that is whether or not intelligent design or creationism may be taught.  I personally don’t care.  Our country, and even our educational system, has much bigger issues to deal with.  I will say this: when I took AP biology, we learned “use-disuse” theory.  (This is essentially the idea that you use it or lose it; the classic example is that giraffes got their long necks by stretching a lot.)  The point wasn’t to get students to believe that use-disuse was true, it was just to make us utilize our critical thinking skills.  So the “teach the controversy” idea isn’t without precedent.

Thoughts on Free Speech

As of yesterday, JuicyCampus.com has shut down for good.  For those of you who are not college students, Juicy Campus was a website in which students could post anonymous comments, primarily gossip, in forums for various schools.  I’m not (in)famous enough to warrant mention on Juicy Campus; from what I could tell it was mostly used by Greeks.  But a lot of students were hurt by it, including a friend of mine.  So I was happy to see it die.

What caught my attention was this quote from Juicy Campus’ CEO Matt Ivester, who blamed the site’s closing on the general economic downturn:

Ivester thanked those who participated in “meaningful discussion about online privacy and internet censorship,” issues that stirred up controversy while the site was active.

The Justice Party platform is unapologetically in favor of freedom of speech.  Profanity, pornography, gossip- they’re all things that I personally dislike.  But short of endangering the safety of others by yelling “Fire!” in a crowded theater, they are protected by the Constitution.  Juicy Campus had every right to exist free from censorship.

That said, one reason free speech is so important, aside from being a basic human right, is that it allows for a free marketplace of ideas.  And ideas that are in such poor taste as Juicy Campus should die a natural death.  I applaud the investors and advertizers who abandoned Juicy Campus, and hope that the students who previously used it will grow a spine and start saying things to their victim’s face.

Misc News

The Mona Lisa Project continues, this time showing an Arizona abortion clinic failing to report sex between a 15-year-old and 27-year-old (a felony in AZ).   The employee also tells the 15-year-old that abortion “doesn’t hurt”- yeah, right.  Watch the video.

It’s official!  The State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) expansion has been signed into law.

USA Today/Gallup Poll reports that Obama’s reversal of the Mexico City policy is the least popular decision of his early presidency, with a mere 35% approval rating.  His most popular was a tie: naming envoys to the Middle East and restricting lobbyist activity each came in at 76%.  Depressingly for me, the nation is split on Obama’s decision to close Guantanamo Bay prison, with 44% approving and 50% disapproving.