Worth more than a thousand words. Lord have mercy.

The two pictures on the top are of creatures that have functioning cerebral cortexes and that have not previously expressed a wish not to be kept alive artificially if in a severely deteriorated and hopeless condition.

Did you fail to point out the distinction because you are:

stupid?

lazy?

dishonest?

dishonest and stupid?

dishonest and lazy?

lazy and stupid?

or dishonest, lazy and stupid?

There are several problems, I believe, with your comments, Mary:
1) There are differing opinions from reputable physicians on whether or not her cerebral cortex is completely gone or not.
2) There are conflicting reports on whether she would want to be like this.
3) If she is being kept alive artificially by being fed and hydrated, then so are babies, small children, adults... now that I think about - everyone!
4) "Hopeless" is in the eye of the beholder. Her parents, who I think are a little closer to her than you or I, don't see it as hopeless. And who are we to tell them?

So, of the four points here, three are grey areas, and one, the "artificial" indictment, is flat wrong.

I don't think we should be taking life when the skies are so gray. It's not like we're making a decision on whether to throw away a plastic cup or recycle it. Grown ups can see that.

One more thing: It seems like the only alternative to disagreeing with you is to be labelled dishonest, lazy, or stupid. Is that what having an open mind is all about? Your views on human life are questionable to say the least. That and your total disregard for other people's opinions are spiritual red flags.

I hope your family will treat you better when it's getting time for you to go, and you give them your opinion that you want to stay a little longer...

Hypothetical: If I had a signed living will stating that I did not want to be kept alive in a PVS, would you be in favor of the state overriding that living will and forcing a doctor or hospice to keep me alive? Even if to do so would violate not only my legally expressed desires, but also those of my surviving family? I'm trying to understand your position here, specifically whether you view this as a sanctity of life issue or an issue of spousal rights, as you alluded on Radical Congruency. Thanks for your time.

There is a conflict here between the secular legal world and the Christian moral world. I believe it would be morally wrong for you to request such a thing, if we're talking about food and water, not heroic/technological efforts (ventilators and medications). However, since I'm a member of a political community and I respect the authority of law, I would not favor the state overriding your living will, IF your diagnosis of PVS was certified by an impartial medical committee.

I think I will be seriously sick just looking at this. No human is perfect, but how can people even stand doing this to innocent animals! My favorite animal is a horse, and my second is a dog, and just seeing these animals like this almost makes me cry. My website has and article on starving dogs- www.freewebs.com/mac_jen_hot_chicks