Posted by PS on March 28, 2005 at 19:54:11:
In Reply to: What my dad's case has in common with Schiavo's. posted by Dave on March 28, 2005 at 17:15:46:
:I am merely addressing the tendency among some conservatives to assume the worst about Michael Schiavo. I think we have to be careful about whom we judge, and what criteria we use.
Agreed. I trust we here all know there's a difference between assuming the worst and carefully observing the situation and possible motivations a person may have. We are not called to be fully blind. There is also a distinction between judging in final condemnation and judging in discernment and wisdom. All that to say that I do agree with you more than you know. Perhaps the "greedy adulterer" title and intro is a bit overstated, though, at least in present company? Certainly using americandigest.com to typify conservatives is a gross generalization. Such a presentation might lead an uninformed observer to believe that you assume the worst about "conservatives" like me and PJ also. I hope you do not think I am hastily jumping to conclusions and utterly condemning Michael. I do see what I see, and I am allowed. I am not supporting any group's platform or agenda. My faith and my philosophies are my own. I have explored these kinds of issues long and hard in both academic and religious contexts, and will be struggling with them for the rest of my life. There are few easy answers, and I do not seek them. In my graduate studies, I am currently engaging the ethical positions of both the Catholic church and the medical community in such controversial cases. (I have provided a very brief intro at the bottom of a post in another thread.)
We can all have our ideas. I fully respect the words of Marcos, John, Bill, PJ, and everyone who has shared. I especially respect your insights because of your personal experience. Thank you for your willingness to share it. I will say a prayer for your dad and his wife.