RE: in shock

Date: Mon Feb 26 2001 - 19:42:12 PST

"Lisa Dusseault" <> writes:
> Yeah, right. The man was 49 years old. I doubt that most people would be
> willing to sacrifice twenty years of their life to die in your approved
> fashion.
> What you've just said is, everybody who died of breast cancer, prostate
> cancer or leukemia, died the WRONG WAY. There's no right way to die and for
> you to suggest otherwise is a slap in the face to anyone who's lost someone
> they loved to cancer.

I'd rather die doing something heroic than die of breast cancer,
prostate cancer, or leukemia; I'd rather live courageously and die
because of my courage than live timidly and long; and I approve of
other people doing the same thing. I think Martin Luther King, Jr.,
died the right way. I don't think that statement slights the many
people who fought the same fight and lived.

Doing dangerous things sometimes costs you your life. Sometimes it's
worth it. Will Earnhardt's family agree with his decision to risk his
life and eventually lose it for NASCAR? I don't know. I suppose if
his son thinks it was a stupid way to die, he'll find another career.
(I don't think it's something I'd give my life for, but I guess I
don't think as much of car racing as some people do.)

I think dying of breast cancer because you smoked for fifty years is
an ignoble way to die. I know many smokers who disagree with me.

I'd also rather die quickly and painlessly, knowing I was going to
die, than die slowly and in agony. I don't suppose Earnhardt knew he
was going to die, but he had the other stuff right.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Apr 27 2001 - 23:18:42 PDT