|
Sunday, 22 Rabi'ul Awal 1426 The major religions of the world ― Christianity, Hinduism, Islam,
Judaism, Sikhism and Buddhism ― in a seminar in Cambridge in 1990,
affirmed their “belief in the innate love for eternal values such as
Truth, Justice, Righteousness, Love, compassion and care towards all
creation, which the spiritual self of each individual is innately
endowed with by God.”
Thus they all negate the false concept that man’s values are man-made and subject to change as society changes.
In fact, as Islam clearly posits, the moral dimension is one of the
five dimensions of the Divinely ordained human personality (the other
four being the physical, the rational, the aesthetic and the
spiritual). However, since these dimensions constitute a dynamic,
organic whole, any activity related primarily to one dimension, impacts
positively or negatively on the other dimensions of the human
personality.
It is in this context of objective moral values that we need to examine
the respect for life. The One True God, the Ever-Bountiful Creator is
the Originator and Source of all life. We, human beings, have no right,
whatsoever, to take any life, except in accordance with God’s Guidance,
or else, “ . . if anyone kills a human being, unless it be for murder
or spreading mischief and corruption on earth, it shall be as though he
had killed all human beings.” (Holy Qur’an, 5:32)
And He, the Almighty, has informed us in His Final Revelation, “Blessed
be He in whose hand all sovereignty rests, and He has power over all
things: He who has created DEATH as well as LIFE so that He may test
you (as to) which of you is best in conduct, and He alone is Almighty,
Truly Forgiving.” (Holy Qur’an, 67:1-2)
In a world, saturated with callous disrespect for the sanctity of life
by individuals, gangs, militias and governments, two recent cases
demonstrate opposing attitudes.
In the first, a court in California (on November 12, 2000) convicted
Scott Peterson for murder in the first degree in the killing of his
pregnant wife, Luci, and of MURDER IN THE SECOND DEGREE in the killing
of their unborn child ― a powerful affirmation of the RIGHT TO LIFE OF
THE UNBORN.
The second is the horrifying case of Terri Schiavo, who died on March
31, 2005, after nearly 14 days of court-imposed dehydration and
starvation. Here was a young woman who collapsed in 1990 and was
diagnosed with brain damage. Her husband, recognized by the Court as
her guardian, over the years, blocked any re-diagnosis using modern
equipment or even any MRI.
Even though she had had no meaningful
therapy since 1991 (due to her husband), Terri Schiavo was not in a
“persistent vegetative state” i.e., neither was she permanently
unconscious, nor was there the absence of cognitive behaviour or
purposeful interaction with her environment. Also she was not hooked up
to any life-support machines ― ventilators, dialysis machines,
heart-pumps etc.
All she needed was a simple feeding and water tube,
because of difficulties with swallowing.
Yet over the years her husband continued to petition the Court to have
her feeding tube removed and the Court, more specifically Judge Greer,
agreed to this on a number of occasions. In February 2000 the judge
ruled to remove Terri’s nutrition tube and he also denied a petition to
allow her swallowing tests.
On April 24, 2001, feeding was terminated,
but on April 26, 2001, another judge, Judge Quesada, felt compelled by
new evidence to have her feeding resumed.
Again on July 23, 2001, Judge Greer ordered Terri’s feeding to be
stopped. In Appellate Court ruling, ordering Terri to be neurologically
tested, stayed the termination of nutrition. When the husband objected
to medical and neurological testing, and the Court-appointed mediator
failed to come to an agreement with the two sides as to which tests,
Judge Greer approved only a few and denied the rest.
On November22, 2002, Judge Greer, once more, ordered the removal of the
nutrition tube ― this time to begin on January 3, 2003. A stay was
however granted pending appellate resolution. Then in September 2003
Judge Greer scheduled October 15, 2003, for the removal of sustenance
and this was done, yet, again, Legislative intervention by the Florida
legislature caused the resumption of feeding.
Finally however with the final termination of nutrition in March 2005,
all the Appellate Courts refused to intervene, in spite of the US
Congress.
And so it is that a physically viable human being, albeit brain
damaged, who had no life-support machines, who visibly responded to
love and affection from her parents and who had police in her room
round the clock to prevent her parents from ever moistening her parched
lips with a wet sponge, succumbed after being deprived of food and
water for nearly fourteen days, on the orders of the Court. On March
31, 2005, the world witnessed, as Ralph Nader, the noted
consumer-activist put it, a “court-imposed homicide.”
Surely, in the test of life and death, the wanton disregard displayed
for the sanctity of life in this case, must render all responsible,
accountable before the One True God. May God guide us all to that which
is right, to that which I pleasing to Him.
|
