Things like life and death are deeply personal decisions and I think both sides on this Terri Schiavo (search) case argue it from deeply held and honestly held convictions. So I'm not here to yell, or shout, or demagogue.
No one knows what Terri's thinking or even "if" she's thinking. We do know — for now — that she is alive.
Maybe years and years ago, she would have wished she were dead to see herself alive like she is today. We just don't know... for sure. Her husband says one thing. Her parents say another. And a nation rushes to make out living wills so that their intentions are never in doubt.
My only question is: What, ultimately, is life?
If you were to ask a 20-something year old that when they were 40-something they'd have a debilitating disease that would slowly sap their strength, their ability to walk and see, even think and move and that this disease would only worsen and likely kill them, they might put in writing: kill me first.
But many who deal with such debilitating diseases fight on, live on, carry on and go on. Just like the soldier who could never envision a life without arms or legs, yet somehow adjusts and rues the day he ever thought of ending that life.
"Life" is different things to different people and I don't think it's a bad thing to cling to — even while the life we cling to isn't perfect.
For me, this much is clear: I think our presumed bias should be toward life. Let other countries explore euthanasia and killing someone mercifully. My fear is that as such logic progresses, it isn't always merciful.
Something is very wrong in a country that can throw you in jail for not giving your dog food and water, but not even care if you do the same to a human being.
Watch Neil Cavuto weekdays at 4 p.m. ET on "Your World with Cavuto" and send your comments to firstname.lastname@example.org