Thursday, February 17, 2005

WHAT'S IMPORTANT VS. WHAT'S IN THE NEWS (OR BLOGS)

Years ago, I started using the Franklin Planner system. A key point made in the training on the system is that you have to distinguish between what's Urgent (a ringing phone, an instant message, the Super Bowl, etc.) and what's Important (getting the tax records together in January, being at a child's recital, taking the time to be with an elderly relative who is in fragile health). Something can be both Urgent and Important, but, when you take the time to think about it, few of the Urgent tasks are all that Important.

A test that tells you whether something is truly Important - how will this affect my life in 5 - 10 years if I ignore this task? If there is little or no effect, then the task may not qualify as Important.

The Eason case has taken up much blogging time over the last few weeks. Even after his resignation, many blogs have devoted much space to the issues raised.

I just don't think the issues involved are as Important, let alone as Urgent, as posting on the Terry Shiavo life watch. For those who aren't familiar with the issues involved, go to My Vast Right Wing Conspiracy to see a list of blogs that are trying to raise awareness about Terry's family's fight for her life. This case is an example of an issue that is BOTH Important and Urgent.

I have posted before about this, even when I was writing on Right We Are! (now defunct). I believe that this woman has been kept alive for a purpose, which involves raising questions about so-called the Right to Die. (Isn't it interesting that the Right to Life is ridiculed by the liberals, while the Right to Die is virtually sacred?)

BTW, have you left instructions about your choices, should you not be able to speak? Don't just fill out any "Living Will", check out the one that doesn't assume that a sick individual will want to "check out" ASAP. There is more information about the Terry Shiavo case on that site.

No comments: