Here is a tragic tale about a woman affected with a terrible terminal illness who only wished to die in peace. Instead, her months were spent in terrible pain, and her last hour was spent “vomiting faecal matter” as her brother “held a bowls under his sister’s chin.” Before her death, Ms. Flowers begged her society for the right to die as she wanted:
“The law wouldn’t let a dog suffer the agony I’m going through before an inevitable death. It would be put down. Yet under the law, my life is worth less than a dog’s.”
Her brother ads:
“How can that be right? How can society believe terminal patients should be put through awful agonising deaths?
What is to blame for this perverse reversal of morality which defines “compassion” as the glorification of human misery? At first, I was tempted to blame the socialist mentality of Australia’s ruling Labor Party. Under the collectivist ideology, human beings are slaves of the State, and may not live or die except by the State’s judgment that they are of use to Society. On the other hand, the religious ideology is that human beings are animated corpses, souls given a temporary lease on mortal life for the sole purpose of blind obedience to their deity, who may not live or die except by the ruling of his earthly representatives.
In this case, it may be both as Austrialia’s current prime mister is a vocal leftist commited to integrating Christianity into the political sphere.
Wow, and I always considered Australia to be a mostly civilized country.
“How can that be right? How can society believe terminal patients should be put through awful agonising deaths?”
This is more proof that altruism is not about benevolence towards one’s fellow man but rather, it’s about suffering and pain not to achieve some goal but as a permanent way of life. Suffering for suffering’s sake.