Terri Schiavo Question

Jason jason at nospam.com
Fri Apr 1 15:07:39 EST 2005


In article <Csednc-GjsIfCtDfRVn-vg at giganews.com>, "MZ"
<zarellam at removetwcny.rr.comspam> wrote:

> > He did not allow her to die. The judges forced her to starve to death. If
> > you locked your dog or cat in a room and did not feed the cat or dog for
> > three weeks--you would be arrested and placed in jail for animal abuse.
> 
> This is always brought up as some sort of argument to attempt to portray
> Terri as lower than a dog in their eyes.  Or whatever the effect is.  But
> it's quite clear that such laws regarding animal cruelty are hypocritical at
> best, and should be stricken from the books.  What's done to cows or pigs
> for making our sandwiches is sometimes far worse than starving the animal,
> yet it's not only allowed - it's encouraged (sometimes through subsidies).
> So, even though your point may be that Terri should be given the "rights" of
> these animals (the difference, of course, was that Terri couldn't perceive
> the pain that the animals can perceive), I'd counter that the animals
> shouldn't be given any rights in this regard.

I understand your point of view. My point was that a human should have
more rights than dogs and cats. You mentioned that Terri could not
perceive pain. Neither you or I or anyone else knows whether or not Terri
could percieve pain. We can only guess. I have fasted for 24 hours and did
experience pain--I drunk plenty of water. I have seen a cat that appeared
to be in terrible pain related to being hungry or in need of water. The
cat appeared to be in pain. It's my guess that Terri did experience pain.
Her parents told the news media that she appeared to be in pain. It's my
guess that she was in pain.

-- 
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.






More information about the Neur-sci mailing list