Once someone has passed away, people of faith will often say “He/She has gone to a better place”. The implication is that when you die, if you have been a good faithful person and are admitted through the pearly gates then “Life” really begins. The afterlife is so much better than the, oh I don’t know what to call it, for lack of better term “living” life.
So my question is: If the afterlife is so much greater than the “living” life why do so many people of faith (and this is all faiths, not just christians) go there kicking and screaming? They fight it tooth and nail and want every measure taken to keep them in this life. The Pope for example drew up a living will that stated he wanted every possible measure taken to sustain his life even if he were in a coma or persistent vegatative state (that’s about to become the next “buzz” phrase, wanna bet. Won’t take long till we’re all sick of hearing that term). Others will spend countless hours praying for the sick and dying to miraculously overcome their terminal ailment. Why? Let them go…they’re going to a better place. Right??
I’m not trying to be critical. This just seems like a contradiction to me and I’ve never understood it. It seems like the counter-argument to “Well when you atheists are on your death bed, then you’ll find God.” Okay sure, maybe I’ll try to reach out then in desperation, but why the hell are you trying so hard to push him away?
My theroy has always been (I will catch hell for this and I always do) one of the major reasons we as humans worship a higher unearthly is our fear of death.
That about Terri Shivo. Her brain was Jello. Shad and was going to have no quality of life in here on Earth. If I am wrong and there is a heaven she should be allowed to pass. There should be no debate about it.
It think that letting someone go make us feel more mortal and if we can keep the body of loved ones going we can keep death farther from us.
Simply because life is precious and is meant to be preserved and fought for…
That is not a good answer. Life at all cost make no sense and is inhumane. Terri would have lived a few more years but she would not have improved and odds are high she would have died do to infections caused by bed sores. What kind of life is that?
The need to keep a body going just because life is precious sounds very wrong to me. There is more to life then a beating heart and inflating/deflating lungs.
Do you mean ALL life or just human life?
“Life at all cost make no sense and is inhumane.”
Here is were the faith part kicks in. Life is a gift from God. (not the inevitable result of the primordial ooze) As such, it is not our place to refuse it when the going gets tough. (Note, Catholic doctrine does NOT require fighting to the last ditch.)
Now, the whole grand plan thing. It is not hard to imagine that one purpose of Terri Schiavo’s existence was to generate the debate surronding her circumstances.
"Life is a gift from God. "
Ok but when are we going to reach the point where we are extending life too long? God gave a disorder to Terri where just a few decades ago she would have died. So is it God’s will we keep the body going at all costs even if the person is no longer there?
I don’t think food and water are considered “at all costs.”
.
“As such, it is not our place to refuse it when the going gets tough”
As a Christian, that sentence doesn’t make much sense to me. Somehow it’s not ok to allow ou gift from God to slip away, but it’s perfectly ok to fight against God when we’re dying? Both life and death are under God’s control and no amount of fighting or giving up is going to change when that happens. The reason people struggle with death is because we are human, weak, fallible, and the prospect of leaving this world really tests our faith in the afterlife. Even though we believe there is a better place, that doesn’t mean we’re ready to let this one, or the people and things in it, go. What if we’re wrong? What if we didn’t do enough to get to heaven? What if all here is is dirt? Not many people are so supremely certain of their faith that these questions don’t enter their minds when death is near.
That’s where faith and ultimately, God’s will comes to play…
When did I say all costs? Dude why the hell don’t you read what people write? My point being that God came up with all these ways for us to die and as we push our ability to sustain a body we grab on to it and comfort of the person be damned they are going to live!!!
You still won’t answer the question why it is so important to keep people with no quality of life away from god?
Tibbs, I think the theory is that God’s will is going to be done either way. So, if god wants someone to die, they will die regardless of the care we give them. Since people look at life as a divine gift, it is incumbent on them to fight for it until God takes it from them, rather than surrender it willingly. The question they would ask you is “What right do you have to decide if someone has quality of life, or if their life is worth saving or not?”
Obviously we feel like we have advanced enough scientifically to determine, generally, quality of life, but we have also advanced enough to feel we can be pretty sure about evolution too, and plenty of people of faith have trouble with that too.
Who are we to judge the quality of one’s life?
“Who are we to judge the quality of one’s life?”
We as individuals are. Lets go back to Terri. She told her husband she did not want to live like she was. When he wanted the tube pulled all hell broke loose. What we saw was the pure hatered Christains can throw down.
The feeling I carry away from the Terri Shivo affair is that hate and anger are more important then someones wishes from the believers point of view…
When does an individual have a right to say their life is not worth living?
**We as individuals are. Lets go back to Terri. She told her husband she did not want to live like she was. When he wanted the tube pulled all hell broke loose. What we saw was the pure hatered Christains can throw down. **
Terri’s life wasn’t prolonged by what I personally believe to be by extraordinary measures. She was simply being kept alive by giving her food and water. If it were heart and lung machines doing basic functions for her that would be different. Again, food and water aren’t extraordinary measures.
When does an individual have a right to say their life is not worth living?
It’s up to the individual and conveyed in a very clear and concise manner. In the absence of clear evidence to the contrary the default should be for life, not death.
“Again, food and water aren’t extraordinary measures.”
Niether are oxygen or blood.
“Ok but when are we going to reach the point where we are extending life too long?”
I take this as a challenge to our understanding. Is there a “too” long? What is that time? These are some of the questions that we are moving toward answering.
“God gave a disorder to Terri where just a few decades ago she would have died.”
My view is that God did not “give” her anything. This gets into the difference between omniscient and omnipotent.
“So is it God’s will we keep the body going at all costs even if the person is no longer there?”
Again, using every life extending measure available to science is NOT required by Catholic doctrine. And, although this might fuel the “kill her quick” argument, I believe that she was a person up to the moment of her death, therefore, she WAS there.
“As a Christian, that sentence doesn’t make much sense to me. Somehow it’s not ok to allow ou gift from God to slip away, but it’s perfectly ok to fight against God when we’re dying?”
I think there is a compromise between the choices you set out. At the risk of seeming too jesuitical, I believe the rule for Catholics is that you are not required to exhaust the limits of science to extend life (note, the Church has determined that a feeding tube is palliative, not life extending), though you may choose to do so.
“Both life and death are under God’s control and no amount of fighting or giving up is going to change when that happens.”
I believe that to be true. Nevertheless, my response is under my control, the essence of free will.
“Who are we to judge the quality of one’s life?”
“We as individuals are.”
I believe that the Catholic response is: No, you are not empowered to judge the quality of life. That is God’s job and you will know when time is up because that is when you die.
This does not mean that you can’t exercise your free will to kill yourself or another, it does mean that you are taking a decision reserved for God into your own hands.