Have Your Say 

Recent Comments

1. Could someone explain how allowing this woman to die can be classified as euthanasia? She has been kept in a vegetative state for seventeen years by artificial means; that treatment over that period of years is extremely cruel.

   Posted By: Peter Harrigan

2. Eulana Englaro is not being allowed to die. She is been starved and dehydrated to death. There's a big difference.
   I understand that CathNews simply reports what has been written in other media, but your use of the term allowed to die in your opening paragraph implies that euthanasia is acceptable.
   

   Posted By: Rebecca

3. The euphemism "allowed to die" means that Eluana is being starved to death - murder, and a most painful way to die.

   Posted By: Anne Boyce

4. Your reporter makes a grave mistake in using the phrase 'allowed to die' in the case of Eluana Englaro. Eluana is in a coma, but she is not dying, nor is she being somehow forced to live. Her imminent murder at the wish of her father will involve a slow, painful and horrible death by dehydration. To be informed on what is in store for Eluana, please click the link below and email your Italian diplomatic representative to plead for Eluana's life.
   
   
   
   http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/feb/09020304.html

   Posted By: Maryse Usher

5. This is a contentious issue. Moral theologians have been divided on the issue for over 20 years, respectable moralists such as Richard McCormick, Benedict Ashley and Kevin O'Rourke arguing on strong grounds that ANH can in some situations be considered an extraordinary or disproportionate means of sustaining life and so not not to be obligatory.
   It is therefore inappropriate, to say the least to hear intemporate appellations like murder levelled at the medical intervention proposed in this case. It does nothing to enhance the credibility of the Church either.

   Posted By: Brian Lewis

6. Oh please Rebecca, Anne Boyce and Maryse Usher. Get a collective grip.
   
   The expression "being allowed to die" is a factual expression for what is happening to Ms Englaro. Besides stopping extraordinary interventions that maintain nutrition, nothing active is being done to end her existence. It is not a euphemism and is definitely not murder.
   
   It is highly melodramatic to say that she is being starved and dehydrated to death and it is factually wrong to say that, in her case, it will be a most painful way to die.
   
   Yes, her ANH - only ever intended for short-term support - will be removed and for a conscious person to be starved to death would be extremely painful. But she's unconscious -- and has no conceivable likelihood of regaining consciousness -- and can't experience pain.
   
   By all means have a moral position on this case but please base it in REALITY.

   Posted By: Richard Moore

7. Who are you going to believe and obey Brian, your three "respectable moralists" or the clear, unequivocal and vehemently enunciated judgment of the Holy See?
   
   There are plenty of self-styled "moralists" to whom much of the world gives respect, who say that abortion can in some situations be OK. We know for certain that they are wrong. Abortion is murder and should always be named as such.
   
   Same with euthanasia, whether the means is a cyanide pellet, a gun or deliberately imposed starvation and dehydration. (or "ANH" as you call it. Nice touch, to give a three letter acronym to a simple physical means of providing food and water to people who have difficulty swallowing properly, to make it sound like some sort of terribly arcane, extraordinary and expensive medical procedure. The plastic feeding tube costs a few cents.)
   

   Posted By: Ronk

8. What a pity and pathetic situation! Life is sacred and precious anyway. It is beyond human comprehension.

   Posted By: Musa

9. For the sake of debate would 'RONK' let me know who s/he is? Also anyone else who does not use their REAL name. I find it very dishonest!

   Posted By: Davidanthony Davies

10. How does it follow that a "clear, unequivocal and vehemently enunciated judgment of the Holy See" is enough to detemine what one believes?
    
    Which "we" knows for certain that "they" are wrong? "They" may just as certainly know that "we" are wrong, however the effect of these mutual exclusive certitudes is to create an unbridgeable divide.
    
    It may make one comfortable to wallow in one's own certitudes. Expecting others to do the same is absurd.

    Posted By: Richard Moore

11. Richard, my comment was addressed to Brian who appears to be a Catholic. We believe that Christ has been true to His promise to send the Holy Spirit to lead the Church into all truth, and never let her teach error.
    
    "Davidanthony Davies", wow that name has just GOT to be made up. I demand that you stop being dishonest and reveal your REAL name. I have revealed far, far more personal info about myself than you have here. Not that's it's at all relevant here of course.
    "For the sake of the debate"? What the Dickens has what any commenter's "real" name might or might not be, got to do with the euthanasia debate?
    
    

    Posted By: Ronk

• » Advertise in CathNews

Email to Friend Please fill out the following details (fields marked with a * are mandatory):
Send To Email Address*:
Send To Name *:
Sent By Email Address*:
Sent By Name *:
Text to include in email:
Captcha validation:	please enter the code above:

^ Page Top

Comment on this article

More from this section

1. Holy See demands Williamson retract before full communion

   The Vatican Secretariat of State has said that Pope Benedict was unaware of Bishop Richard Williamson's Holocaust minimising positions prior to lifting his excommunication and has demanded that the SSPX prelate recant his views prior to full communion.

2. Twenty percent of Rudd package for Catholic schools

   Public schools are to receive 70 percent of nearly $14 billion in new funding for all schools if the Rudd Government's second stimulus package is passed with another 20 percent of the funds to go to Catholic schools.

3. Blame game on over SSPX affair

   Cardinal Walter Kasper has stepped up his criticism over the Vatican's handling of the lifting of the excommunication of SSPX Bishop Richard Williamson while German Chancellor Angela Merkel called on Pope Benedict to clearly reject holocaust denial.

4. Pope proposes Lenten fasting "therapy"

   In his just released Lenten message for 2009, Pope Benedict says fasting is important "therapy" for modern Catholics because it helps make them aware of the deprived state in which many people live.

5. Vatican hoses down TAC hopes

   A Vatican source has reportedly denied rumours that Rome has decided to create a personal prelature for members of the Traditional Anglican Communion.