Sunday, March 20, 2005

Terri Schiavo III

I just can't.

I can't post on what's happening to Terri, because I'm too upset. But I can't not post.

The bottom line on this whole broader issue is, as Hugh Hewitt put it Friday on his radio show, that we as a culture do not starve people to death. That's not what America is about.

We don't allow people to withhold food and water from the children in their care. We don't allow people to withhold food and water from the animals in their care. We don't allow prison guards to withhold food and water from inmates. We don't even allow the soldiers in Guantanamo Bay to withhold food and water from the terrorists.

But they're withholding food and water from a helpless woman, based on the hearsay of her estranged husband about whether she'd want to be kept alive if she were in a persistent vegetative state. But there's a real question about whether Terri is even in a persistent vegetative state, which could make her alleged wishes not even apply.

And if they can starve Terri to death, with these questions about her wishes and her condition, they can do that to any one of us at some time in the future if our condition becomes inconvenient or distasteful to the people around us.

Related news article links:

Terri's attorney claims that Terri said she wants to live.

The House & Senate reached a compromise on a bill that would give federal courts the ability to review Terri's case and cases like hers (much the way death penalty cases are allowed federal review)

Democrats are blocking a vote on the bill that would give federal review to Terri's case.

This is a commentary (not a news item) about the direction judicial activism is going, especially as it relates to Terri's case and Judge Greer.

No comments: