Posted on 10/24/2003 4:53:47 PM PDT by calif_reaganite
A Glimmer of Hope for the Culture of Life
Igor A. Birman
The Declaration of Independence, our nation’s founding charter, places an ultimate primacy on the right to life. Indeed, the founding fathers recognized it as first in the order of natural rights that all human beings derive from the Creator. The reason for this primacy is simple: the rights to liberty and the pursuit of happiness both derive from the right to life, since it is self-evident that one can neither be free nor pursue happiness without first being able to enjoy the right to life.
The foundation of our country lay in the principle that human beings possess these God-given rights and protecting them from infringement is the primary purpose of government. These natural rights are therefore guaranteed, as they can never be taken away from the people by the state, since they are granted by a higher authority. This principle is the guiding force behind the culture of life that was prevalent in our society until the Supreme Court created by fiat a right to abortion.
The outcome of Roe v. Wade, allowing abortion on-demand, cannot be reconciled with the recognition of God-given rights, since the High Court decreed that one’s right to life could be summarily taken away by a fellow human being. Accordingly, abominations like partial-birth abortion and euthanasia came to be tolerated and even accepted by society as the culture that accepted and cherished all life began the process of fading away.
A procedure where the baby is partially delivered while the back of its head is punctured and its brain removed by suction is indicative of a society that no longer embraces life. This grave recognition is furthered by the fact that this procedure is never medically necessary. Therefore, no argument can be logically advanced to make this grisly practice consistent with the primacy of the natural right to life. Rather, it equates life of the baby with the sheer whims of another human being.
Similarly, euthanasia disgracefully balances life against the perceived usefulness of the individual or his assumed quality of life. A perfect example of this is the case of Terri Schiavo in Florida. A woman whose brain damage is at worst disputed, but clearly not terminal, who breathes on her own and shows signs of interaction would have been legally allowed to be starved and dehydrated to death, save for the intervention of Governor Bush.
Abandonment of the sanctity of life leads to a paradigm opposite of one based on natural rights derived from the Creator. It posits that rights, such as life and liberty, come from the government and consequently the government can take them away. A classic example of this latter approach was Nazi Germany, where people deemed inefficient, useless to society or inferior for any reason were methodically murdered by the state. The advent of this paradigm manifested itself by the state ordering the euthanasia of thousands of people, justifying it by claiming that their lives were not worth living and culminated with a state-sponsored killing machine second to none.
Recent events, however, point to the fact that this departure from the culture of life, however serious, can be stopped and even reversed. The passage of the bill to end the barbarous practice of partial-birth abortion and its imminent signing by President Bush indicate a swing back to the primacy of life, especially when coupled with the fact that the bill passed the U.S. Senate with an almost 2/3 supermajority.
Similarly, the actions taken by the Florida Legislature and Governor Jeb Bush to end the legal starvation of Terri Schiavo is an indication that our society will not be forced to completely abandon life as its cornerstone, despite the efforts of the radical Left. Their vision of a culture of death has suffered a serious double setback and is further being eroded by shifting public opinion, best evidenced by a recent poll showing that more women are now pro-life than pro-abortion.
Thomas Jefferson once said that, “the God who gave us life gave us liberty at the same time; the hand of force may destroy, but cannot disjoin them.” Clearly, our future as a free society is directly and inexorably linked to the recognition that liberty is firmly based on life. In order to preserve our freedom we must commit ourselves to cherish life as a fundamental right. Even though the recent events, which shine as a glimmer of hope for the culture of life, face an uncertain future in our judiciary, they show that through hard work, the sanctity of life can and will be preserved, thereby assuring our future as a free society.
IGOR BIRMAN is a candidate for Juris Doctorate at the Emory University School of Law. He welcomes your comments at igor@igorbirman.com
The pages start with nurse Carla Iyer's affidavit. Carla Iyer's license indicates that she is still practicing --- see Reply 53.Michael Schiavo's sworn testimony that he would spend the rest of his life taking care of Terri --- see Reply 105, item 23 therein.
Nurse Carolyn Johnson's affidavit --- see Reply 78.
Nurse Heidi Law's affidavit --- see Reply 86.
The first time in court, that Michael Schiavo recollects that Terri allegedly had expressed some wish that she would not want to live, was in the year 2000, ten years after her initial medical emergency --- see Reply 124, item 20 therein.
A bone scan ordered by a doctor, and performed on March 5, 1991, just over a year after her initial medical emergency in February 1990, concluded that she suffered from a history of bone trauma --- see Reply 221.
National Socialist party. History repeats itself.
Very good.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.