Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: one_less who wrote (78114)	10/22/2003 1:29:45 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

another view which honors the sanctity of human life over self serving utilitarianism. You create a dichotomy where none need exist. Sometimes there is such a dichotomy. Sometimes the two views lead to the same decision. Frankly, I believe that the case of Terri is one such case, where both the sanctity of human life and utilitarianism coincide. There is no sanctity, IMO, in keeping a body breathing and "alive" when there is no person there, when there is none of the activity that makes a person a person. Terri is dead. Whoever she was is gone. It is only her body which is contiuning to function purely by the imposition of medical techlonogy. There is no human life there, no realistic hope or expectation of human life returning to that body, and therefore no sanctity of human life to be concerned about.