I'm watching last week's episode of "The Practice". I love the show, but they just did something that I see happen a lot and it frustrates me.
They had the D.A. arguing for an unborn baby. If you watch the show you know that the man is going nuts. Since the end of last season he's been slowly losing it. That's all well and good, the man is nasty. BUT... he was giving a pro-life argument (which was quite good by the way). He was awfully rambly with it, and used some very inappropriate words for a courtroom, but he had some very good points. Points with which I agree. The problem is that whenever a person on a TV show gives a pro-life argument (court show, doctor show, whatever) that character has to be one of the "crazy" characters. There's no room for a rational person to believe that life, before or after birth, is sacred. That's very frustrating to me. *steps off soap box*
OK, second issue on the show today (well, last week) is the right of parents to refuse medical attention for their child. I'm not sure how I feel about this one. I've always believed that a person's rights end when they infringe on another person's rights. The "my rights end at the beginning of your nose" thing. If a parent's religious beliefs say that they can't accept medical care, then that's fine. But what about their kids? Does that right extend to refusing medical care for their children? A parent's rights and the child's rights are so mixed up together. If a little kid damages someone else's property then the parent is responsible for paying the damages. So the parent's actions and the kid's actions are one and the same from that view. Parents are 100% responsible for their kids, especially little ones. But can they make a decision that isn't medically considered the best one? But what if it is the best decision religiously?
I'm really rambly here, I think it's because I'm really unsure as to my feelings about it.