When the Homily is about Immunology

The Logic of Life
(warning, there are cuss words in this post, please forgive me, but you should have heard me in my car when I heard this story!)

I listen to NPR alot. generally I enjoy listening, but sometimes they take such a one sided approach that it is simply inexcusable and cannot be considered a fari reporting of the news. Case and point, last night on All Things Considered the story of Terri Schiavo regaining the right to be fed was covered...or at least one side of the story was.

I could not find the entire section of the program which I heard - in particular the short interview which followed Jon Hamilton's audio report. In this interview we are forced to listen to a Yale doctor telling us all about the situation and the ethics involved. At one point he laughed...okay maybe not a full laugh, but certainly a condescending hint of a snicker at the notion of Terri's parents holding out hope that some therapies might help their daughter's condition. Oh yes, that is very funny, isn't it? Asshole.

Like in Jon Hamilton's report we are told that Terri is not reposnding to her parents and is not in anyway communicating with them...despite appearances. You see they can tell this by having their stupid scientific faces glued to brain monitors and then from such data dictate with certainty what is happening in the REAL world. Can I ask: given the amazing complexities of the human mind (of course completely ignoring the issue of a soul), how the hell does anyone know what sort of consciousness Terri has right now? It's bullshit, I don't buy that crap for a second.

The Yale doctor further bestows his wisdom to us and says (just like Jon Hamilton's doctor tell us in his story does) that Terri cannot experience any pain or suffering in her state. I assume this is intended to make us feel better about starving and or dehydrating her to death? But then, to my utter amazement, this doctor (so educated in the realm of ethics) goes on to judge the intentions of the poor ignorant parents of Terri, saying in essence that we should feel sorry for them because their love for their daughter is actually selfish - causing suffering for Terri by keeping her alive in this condition. Now beyond the profound moral judgement this guy is making, didn't he JUST GET DONE SAYING that Terri is unable to suffer or feel anything???? Where is the logic?

Hey NPR! Where was the clergyman in this story to broaden the realm of "ethics"? Where was a represenative for the parents? Where was a similar asshole ethicist who might question the "selfish" motives of the husband? How about anything that might possibly show the arguments for life? Anything, anyone, anywhere? No? Ok.

You know what folks, it's gonna get ugly around here fast...believe me. When science is the sole fuel of our ethics engine, we are going to drive off a cliff.