At Least You Wouldn’t Die Hungry - (debunks "difficult & complex case" argument, No. It's simple)

CHRONWATCH.COM ^ | MARCH 31, 2005 | MATTHEW HOLMES

[CHARLITE]

For every day Terri Shiavo suffers, liberals continue to deny their role in the conspiracy to commit murder.

In an attempt to muddy the water and wash their hands of any responsibility for her death, those who support Terri’s starvation have adopted a new catch phrase: “This is a very difficult and complex matter.”

Whether it is Michael Shiavo’s lawyer, Judge Greer, Jeb Bush, the Florida legislature, or everyone in the partisan media, these modern day equivalents of Pontius Pilate have decided that the best way to wash their hands of Terri’s blood is to constantly mumble some generic form of “This is a very difficult and complex matter.”

It certainly is, if you’re trying to justify starving a helpless woman to death.

Their current “Let Terri Die” campaign, however, is becoming much like Bill Clinton’s “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky” debacle. Specifically, it is method of defending an obvious lie by creating new definitions and endless qualifications for the act involved.

Clinton tried to convince Americans that “sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky” was not the same thing as actually having sex with her, just as the current assertion by liberals that “Letting Terri Die” is somehow not the same thing as “Starving Terri to Death.

In reality, the Shiavo case is pretty simple.

Terri Shiavo’s feeding tube was removed. She is currently not receiving nourishment. By definition, she is starving to death.

Her husband—an adulterer with a new life, girlfriend, and two illegitimate children—claims that many years ago, Terri told him she would not want to be kept alive artificially. There is no proof to support or refute his statement.

I’m not a lawyer, but I’ve watched The People’s Court enough times to know that judges are supposed to rule on evidence, not on the opinion of a philanderer.

Actually, the fact that there is no way to prove Terri’s actual wishes does make it a “difficult and complex matter,” at least for those advocating Terri’s death.

But if Robert Blake and O.J. Simpson are allowed to live due to inadequate evidence, then certainly Michael Shiavo’s opinion alone is not enough to kill Terri.

The indisputable fact is that nobody knows what Terri wanted because it was never written down or publicized.

Who knows? Michael Shiavo might be telling the truth. Or, Michael Shiavo might be a liar. Nobody knows for sure because there is no way for either side to prove to a judge what Terri would want to happen in a situation like this.

She might be, as Michael’s attorney George Felos said, “resting comfortably” as her vital organs begin to shut down. (And I suppose people starving in Africa have never been happier, either).

Or, she might be suffering tremendously, desperately trying to live, as her parents claim.

Having said that, what do we do in America when two sides of a dispute cannot agree on an issue and a woman’s life depends on a judge’s ruling?

Do we kill her, given the lack of evidence that she would want to live?

Or do we let her live, given the lack of evidence that she would want to starve to death?

Without proof of her wishes, nothing else in this case matters.

So, forget for a moment that Terri has never undergone an MRI or a PET scan to determine her level of brain activity. Forget that her husband has denied her therapy. Forget that many suspect he tried to strangle Terri, an act that could have led to her present condition.

Forget the videotapes and the assertions of loved ones that Terri makes noises, follows balloons, or responds to human contact. Forget that when asked if she wanted to live just moments before the feeding tube was removed, Terri reacted in an animated fashion, with the sounds “aaaaaaaah . . . waaaaaaaa.”

Forget that everyone not named Shiavo, Felos, or Greer believe Terri would want to live. The court must base its opinion on evidence, rather than opinion, right?

Once again the question beckons:

How does America treat people in life or death situations, when the person is incapable of making their wishes known and there is no clear proof of their wishes?

Apparently, we just go ahead and kill them.

So says the Florida judicial system, in a ruling that has horrified America, energized the culture of death, and has Scott Peterson kicking himself on death row for not thinking of it first.

Through this judicial and media smokescreen, liberals hope to destroy the otherwise common sense perception of their actions—that they are killing a brain damaged woman who cannot speak for or defend herself.

To anyone not in a persistent vegetative state, it is clear that “Let Terri Die” actually means, “Starve that brain damaged woman to death because her adulterous husband said so.”

That being said, perhaps Congress should subpoena Judge Greer and the Florida Supreme Court to undergo CT scans and MRI’s, because there are many who now suspect they might also suffer from brain damage.

This cannot be what America has become. This cannot be the promise of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, guaranteed to all citizens by our Constitution.

These are not the actions of a country that stands up for the innocent and the helpless.

Nor is it a “difficult and complex matter.”

As Pastor William Rice—Judge Greer’s pastor until he asked Greer to leave Calvary Baptist Church—said regarding the case:

“I know right from wrong. I know what God thinks about human life. I know there is only one way to describe the prospect of starving a woman to death because she cannot feed herself. It is wrong.”

Amen.

The question is frequently being asked, where will this decision lead our nation?

Will it set a precedent for future atrocities, where husbands can euthanize their wives in lieu of adulterous affairs or nasty custody battles? Divorce lawyers sure hope not.

Will murderers be allowed to kill innocent people because their victims (or Jodie Foster) professed a silent “right to die?”

If you think about it, once we have allowed the government to murder an innocent living human being, is there anything we’re not capable of?

To those of you foolish enough to believe that our Constitution gives the government power to decide whether your life merits living, I’ve got an even more ridiculous offer for you. I know this guy by the name of Kevorkian that will guarantee you a ticket straight to Heaven, and give it to you absolutely free!

Of course, it would be a one-way ticket, but at least you wouldn’t die on an empty stomach.

As for liberals, they just want to move on with their lives.

Michael Shiavo has a new wife to marry, George Felos has more people to kill, and liberals need to get back to talking about Abu Ghraib, were torture is barbaric and wrong.

Before you know it, liberal Democrats will be gearing up for the next election, beginning preparations by looking for the best place to hold their convention.

The location must be perfect—somewhere that makes the best statement about who liberals are and what they stand for.

I’d recommend Hell.

Matthew Holmes is a North Carolina-based columnist. His articles have been featured in the North Carolina Conservative, ChronWatch.Com, World Net Daily.Com, News Max.Com, Opinion Editorials.Com, and other media outlets. He can be reached at blade729@msn.com

[Fenris6]

Caller on WMAL radio (Chris Kore's show) said that Terri was "not human, was sub-human" because of her brain damage and therefor it wouldn't be murder to kill her. Followup caller clarified that since Terri's "soul has left" she was just a "human shell" and that killing her is not murder.

Fine. I declare both of them "soul-less" and "sub-human". Please report to the nearest concentration camp for extermination. //sarcasm

[Darkwolf377]

Good piece.

Whatever some folks here think of W's actions, if any "prolife" person worthy of the name extracts vengeance from Bush to teach a lesson (what lesson I have no idea) and lets the likes of Kerry and HRC into power...there's no other way to put it: They're idiots.

Nat Hentoff in a column from the early-mid-nineties explained how Hillarycare would have this kind of thing happening as a matter of course.

I think Bush did what he should have done; the jury is out on whether Jeb did, but at this point I believe he did. That the courts have decided they just don't like the Bush Administration and are going to legislate from the bench doesn't give either Bush the right to sin equally greivously. And in the end, think of the damage that would be done with the party of Barney Frank in command.

[Frank_2001]

Excellent article!

[Rodentking]

Politics is like eating hardtack, always choose the lesser of two weevils. No matter what the President or Governor do, in the future vote for the person most likely to win and least likely to do further damage to our country.

Terri Schiavo has been sentenced to death by starvation and dehydration. If you ask a judge, that is bliss, natural. It is not torture like putting underwear on a prisoner’s head. Ask a judge.

Did the President do all that he could? Clearly not. If he stands with his hands in his pockets, he will die with a hole in his soul. The President of the United States can act. Judges can be overridden by the Executive. There are credible allegations of judicial irregularities, medical malfeasance, intentional medical diagnosis misrepresentation, of attempted murder, of spousal abuse by the husband. Terri Schiavo should be protected by our government until the truth can be determined.

Make no mistake, there are parallel battles going on here:

Terri Schiavo’s fight for life
The deatheaters right to murder
The judicial branch’s fight to remain omnipotent in violation of the Constitution

The judge, acting in addition as jury and executioner, is the enemy of our country.

The President swore to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. To protect our rights to LIFE, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

Time for him to do it.

If he allows Terri Schiavo’s murder, a part of his soul dies, too. He has the power. Is he the man?

[CHARLITE]

Great comment, Fenris6!...........and I really love your tagline!
"(3 Purple Hearts in 4 months w/o missing a day of work? He's either John Rambo or a Fraud)"

[CHARLITE]

Check out JB Williams’ new release which I just posted.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1374344/posts

……..and see my posted comment #7

I like Jeb Bush very much. I think that he is a very good man and exceptionally sincere. I hate to say a thing against him. I know how hard this has been for him. However, I think that if Ronald Reagan were Governor of Florida at this moment, he would say (as one great military officer once said), "Damn the torpedoes. Full steam ahead!"

Reagan would NOT allow this to happen. Whatever it would take, he would save Terri Schaivo. He'd send in the Florida National Guard in sufficient numbers to simply overpower the cops standing death watch at the hospice........and Terri would be taken to a facility where (under Executive Order!) she would be revived, restored and given back her life.

[Mount Athos]

i liked the comment i heard today about the flowers all around Teri's room today. The flowers are getting enough attention and concern to get water. Teri is dying because she isn't getting water, that all the flowers in her room are getting. Bizarre.

[It's me]

oh gosh!!!
This makes me cry

[ClaireSolt]

These stupid courts have left us with a mess that will be on Art Bell show for years and years to come. They should have had a real trial and settled the many questions.