Death and Taxes

Oh boy. I’m not even sure where to begin in describing my positions in regard to the Terry Schiavo scenario.

From my own personal stance, I would not want to be kept alive by machine for a prolonged time. Certainly not if there was no hope for my recovery. If Terry felt the same way, I believe that her wishes should have been carried out.

But as easy as it is for me to say “pull the plug,” I know the position of Terry’s family also. I have had a mother on life support with little to no possibility of revival–though not diagnosed with PVS as was Schiavo. She did recover on life support (a case to not unplug), but later died without the aid of machines (the point at which I always reflect how life support could have changed that outcome). From Michael Schiavo’s standpoint, it is awful to see a loved one living off of a series of tubes and revving, beeping machines–you know they don’t want that; on the other hand, you would do anything not to have to lose someone you love, hanging onto the most microscopic threads of hope.

My musings: If a person is unaware of their existence, then why keep their body alive on a machine? But if they aren’t conscious of their plight, then why does it matter what state their body is kept in, if for ease of mind of the family? But it can’t be healthy for loved ones to live in a lie contrived of such false hope? Honestly, I refuse to be the authority. Death sucks: everyone gets the crap end of the deal. But it is not a person’s body that you miss: it’s their life and the energy they exude, and they don’t radiate much on a ventilator and feeding tube. In my humble opinion, if a person has been in an extended state of mental vegetation with no chance of recovery, their body should not be kept alive; but it would also be a good idea to express personal vindications in a legal document to apply in the case of mental incapacitation. A person is dead when they are incapable of recognizing their existence and have no chance to recover that awareness.

Equal Rights For All…unless it infringes on mine?

I feel that all citizens have the right to choose whether or not they subject themselves (or their children) to a painfully incurable virus–school being a prime vector of disease; therefore I feel that parents whose children are to attend school with an HIV-infected child should be informed of such a situation, in which case they could choose to transfer their child to a different school.

This is where I have to fight the masses.

In America, I am told, EVERYONE has the right to an education (which is to be provided by the government). If that is the case, then the government will be forced to provide a seperate school for children who want to avoid HIV infection because the withdrawal is done under the pretense of the preservation of the well-being and life of a small child. Article 26 of Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the General Assembly of the UN and subsequently, its member nations states that “(3) Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.”

But then the little child with HIV is left all alone at the original school and we are back to square one: children infected with HIV being separated from others. I sympathize greatly with this lonely child. My heart breaks for them. Despite this, I REFUSE to say that uninfected children should be forced to experience HIV exposure. Maybe his parents should get over the fact that other parents don’t want to infect their small children with HIV and work to establish a private school for lots of little infected children, it wasn’t a good idea for such a susceptible person to expose themselves to such a bath of illness anyway.

My real solution to the problem? Take education out of the government’s jurisdiction. Our government was established to protect the rights and liberties of its people, and its power has extended past its purpose. But I guess that’s another discussion.

If I Could Turn Back Time…

Given the opportunity to reverse the sands of time, I would pay a friendly visit to a man who has had a great impact on the field of science. Primarily a biologist, this man not only conquered the concepts of DNA replication, lipids, and meiosis (too name a few), but then dedicated 90 days of each year to pass on such scientifically vital information to his avid (and some not-so-avid) protegées. Without his relentless duties of informing the masses, our great world would lack some number in the fields of medicine, biochemistry, and forensics (or maybe just in a number of unused biology diplomas). He is credited with legitimizing such theories as “Succes is measured by the number of offspring.” “Shape determines function.” “Dawkins is the antichrist.” and “You don’t pick your mate because you ‘LOVE’ them, they’re just pretty and you want your offspring to look like them so they may perpetuate your genes.”

On my blast from the past, I would begin on a positive note and thank Dr. Butler for the use of his “magic pencils” during my NC Biology EOC. Then I would frantically seize him by the shoulders and shout–with spit flying–that he MUST, he MUST not buy an SUV. He would scoff and try to make me solve an equation to prove the economical impracticality of buying a hybrid vehicle. “IMPRACTICALITY?” I would screech. “Impracticality? How about this for an impracticality? The war for foreign oil will wage on until there is none left. None–thanks to your 14 miles to the gallon. But the countries who never had it will think the countries who did have it still do. And then they will start launching nuclear missles.” At this point he would raise an eyebrow and sip his Dr. Pepper in a way that indicated his disbelief. I would explain that I was from the future. More disbelief. Sigh. “So the countries newly without–but still considered to have–oil will catapult back their own nuclear weapons until all the major countries of the world are a nuclear wasteland. I wish that were only the worst. All the smog that your ‘Supremely Unnecessary Vehicle’ contributed to hung over Denver, collecting radiation particles and transforming Colorado into a Chernobylian freakshow. Deeming themselves a seperate race of man damaged by the actions of the U.S. government, the state of Colorado seceded from the union and is implementing an army with which to exact revenge…” This is the point where he would begin to peer into my face for signs of pupil dilation or white powders. “…upon all those who ever supported the use of an SUV. Oh please: if your genes are to march through time uninhibited by mutations that will place your descendants’ eyes on their feet, then you will refrain from purchasing that gas guzzler.” I might even bring him some pictures of the disaster, all the while cursing Photoshop for its discrediting of the digital image. His skepticism would show and I might even resort to graphs in a hopeless attempt to convince him of his worth as a businessman if he would just invest in a hybrid vehicle.

I would begin to hear the future calling me back and my body would begin to fill with bright white light. As I faded back into the present I would call to him in a most desperate tone. And then I would vanish. And he would go buy his Lincoln Navigator. At least I tried.