Now that Terry Schindler-Schiavo has finally passed, I'll document here my feelings on the matter.
I see it very simply. Any time a human being has the ability to choose whether another human being lives or dies, the choice must always fall on the side of life. Of course, a living will that, in writing, states that a person does not wish to live may change this.
In the Terry Schindler-Schiavo case, it was not clear what her feelings were. In this case, she must be (or should have been) allowed to live.
I agree with Pope John Paul II's statements, made a year ago:
"The intrinsic value and the personal dignity of every human being does not change no matter what the concrete situation of his life."
"The administration of water and food, even when provided by artificial means, always represents a natural means of preserving life, not a medical act."
"Considerations about the 'quality of life,' often actually dictated by psychological, social and economic pressures, cannot take precedence over general principles"
In this argument, I've heard several people argue that they would not want to "live that way." What does "that way" mean exactly? How can one measure the level of quality of life at which it is no longer acceptable to be alive?