Sunday, May 27, 2012

QOL and the Cult of Death

On April 25 of this year, I had a post Treating Human Life like an Old Car in which I stated:
We have been discussing human life in utilitarian terms. Like a old car, we seem to have decided, without much debate among those who will be affected, that at some point we just throw that person away. We view people as if they were units, not unique individuals. But each human is unique. Their presence touches our lives, and our lives would be poorer if they were not there. The cost of repairing the old car is greater than old car is worth. But, a human life can not be weighed by its utility to anyone in particular, or to society as a whole. If we were to weigh a human life in terms of utility to society as a whole, more prisoners would be executed, rather than spend the $30,000 that the average inmate costs society in this country. Surely criminals contribute nothing to society. But we don't execute people for petty crimes. Life is a gift from God, and only God has the right to end a life. It is not for us to hurry death along, particularly for the reason that this hospital bed is needed by another, so just hurry up and die.
I want to take that argument further now. Quality of Life (QOL) arguments are really QOL as defined by someone other than the one facing death, as it was for this unfortunate little girl in Vietnam. Casey Mattox has the story in a piece entitled Born Alive to a Dead World at the American Thinker today. In her case, the person defining the QOL was a combination of her mother and various doctors based on ultrasound findings that indicated the child would be born with debilitating, possibly fatal, flaws. As it turns out, the child had none of these flaws, but was allowed to die anyway. I am sure that God does not turn away such innocent life from an everlasting relationship with Him, but what a tragedy for her mother and father, who will never know her. What a tragedy for her future husband, her own children, and so on. Rather than view life as a gift from God, which should be preserved to the best of our ability, even at the cost of our own lives, certain people have decided that they know what is best for the rest of us. They have defined QOL, and whether we agree or not, they mean to enforce it. If we don't agree to die on our own, they will deny medical help. We will, as this poor, unnamed girl, die by neglect. They will deny food, and water, and wait us out. Nothing so kind as a bullet to the brain. Apparently the elites defining our QOL for us are squeamish about out and out murder, but less so about murder by neglect.

One of the arguments advanced early on against abortion on demand was that the some of very same rationales for abortion could eventually be used to justify euthanasia. Eventually, the rationales for euthanasia could be defined down to any point one wished. And then it is a small step from euthanasia to eugenics. Why not sterilize every person of child bearing age who has a tendency to obesity? In a generation of two or three, we could wipe out the "obesity epidemic." Obesity negatively affects QOL after all. Why not abort the fetuses of women who smoke, or who are alcoholic or drug abusers? Such children will not have a good life according to our elites. We might as well nip future gang members in the bud.

God must weep every time a child he has sent to someone shows back up as "Return to Sender."  He must be crest fallen when someone shows up prematurely because no one could be bothered to help a person through one more day, one more hour.  Is this really the paradise on earth the Leftists promised us?  

1 comment:

  1. "Is this really the paradise on earth the Leftists promised us?"

    Actually, it is the "paradise" they promised themselves, filled with those who believe, with them, that only the pure and perfect (Left) should be allowed to live. They have no problem recommending death for everyone else.