Kevorkian would have done things differently
We all remember Dr. Death right? He presided over 100 doctor-assisted suicides in the 1990s. Now he sits in jail for violating Michigan law and is also dying of Hepatitis C.
Through his lawyer, Kevorkian wonders if he should have acted differently.
As ABC reports: Now, as he sits in jail, Kevorkian may have had a change of heart — not about his dedication to the "death with dignity" movement, but on how he went about promoting it.
He did what he did, and it brought it to public awareness [of physician-assisted suicide]," said Kevorkian's attorney, Mayer Morganroth. "He now realizes that having performed it when it was against the law, wasn't the, probably, appropriate way to go about it. … What he should have done was work towards its legalization verbally. … Pursuing that cause, and not performing it because it still was against the law."
So that leaves us with the question: does one have the right to violate a law he feels is unjust? or is his duty to fight to change that law?
Kevorkian stridently took the first stance a decade ago, but seems to have switched to the latter in his final days.
If we look back to the opening paragraphs of the Declaration of Independence, we find these words: Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it
In our conservative age, such ideas are considered dangerous heresy. How dare we question W, Dick and the others? And I'm pretty certain that Jefferson and the other founding fathers would be horrified at such rhetoric.
What I'm saying is, I don't think Dr. Death did the wrong thing. In fact, our country needs more people like him who are willing to risk everything for what they think is just. Protest is not dangerous, it is an obligation of democracy.
Any attitude that says that government is always right and should be not questioned is distinctly un-American.
The link: http://abcnews.go.com/US/LegalCenter/story?id=2008364&page=1
Through his lawyer, Kevorkian wonders if he should have acted differently.
As ABC reports: Now, as he sits in jail, Kevorkian may have had a change of heart — not about his dedication to the "death with dignity" movement, but on how he went about promoting it.
He did what he did, and it brought it to public awareness [of physician-assisted suicide]," said Kevorkian's attorney, Mayer Morganroth. "He now realizes that having performed it when it was against the law, wasn't the, probably, appropriate way to go about it. … What he should have done was work towards its legalization verbally. … Pursuing that cause, and not performing it because it still was against the law."
So that leaves us with the question: does one have the right to violate a law he feels is unjust? or is his duty to fight to change that law?
Kevorkian stridently took the first stance a decade ago, but seems to have switched to the latter in his final days.
If we look back to the opening paragraphs of the Declaration of Independence, we find these words: Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it
In our conservative age, such ideas are considered dangerous heresy. How dare we question W, Dick and the others? And I'm pretty certain that Jefferson and the other founding fathers would be horrified at such rhetoric.
What I'm saying is, I don't think Dr. Death did the wrong thing. In fact, our country needs more people like him who are willing to risk everything for what they think is just. Protest is not dangerous, it is an obligation of democracy.
Any attitude that says that government is always right and should be not questioned is distinctly un-American.
The link: http://abcnews.go.com/US/LegalCenter/story?id=2008364&page=1
Comments