Posted on 03/23/2005 11:00:46 AM PST by MHGinTN
Aside from killing a disabled woman, what’s the controversy?
A cousin asked me the other day, “What’s this Terri Schiavo thing all about down in Florida?” I did my best to catch cousin up to speed on the history of the plight. While on line, a newbie at FreeRepublic cited four points over which the newbie needed confirmation or correction. I did my best to address the problems with the perspective expressed in the four points of interest as stated by the poster.
Clearly, there are different levels to this issue; this is not a simple controversy lending itself to sound byte explanations, though the mainstream media tend to over simplify and use sound byte explanations, usually tainted with the network’s bias –such as the stilted poll done by ABC, for which they received precisely the ammunition they were trolling for, rather than an honest perspective of the American people.
Let’s take a look at the controversy from a perspective other than bedside sadness.
First, there is a lengthy judicial process followed in Florida, and controversy and major dispute beginning with the power and perspective of one Judge Greer. Terri was receiving due process without complaint from any family member, until Judge Greer’s court took over dealing with the controversies. Every appeal following the Greer rulings amounted to other courts rubber stamping Greer’s actions … and therein lies the reason for the Congress of the United States finally getting involved.
That brings us to a second point of controversy, with major political ramifications. A state judge in a Florida court has order that a non-criminal severely disabled woman be put down via starvation and dehydration by ordering that the port for her feeding tube be removed … and a feeding tube is all this woman needs to continue living. [Is food and water actually artificial medical intervention?]
Last week, the United States Congress issued an oversight action authorized by the Constitution in the Third Amendment, in order to give Terri Schaivo assurance that her Fourteenth Amendment rights were not short changed in arriving at her current court ordered sentence of death by dehydration. The bill issued by Congress stated a request for a ‘de novo’ hearing of the case at Federal level. The Federal Judge who received the case chose to ignore the request and do yet again what has been done at every judicial stage in this controversy, glance at Greer’s rulings and stamp them adequate for Terri’s rights.
It is precisely the questionable nature of Greer’s rulings that caused Congress to request a Federal de novo hearing. What if Greer has a bias or new facts have come to light that indicate Terri Schiavo has not in fact received fair and balanced treatment from the court or the court has been in error due to inadequate facts? How can the wrong rulings of a judge be questioned in a process where rubber stamping passes the rulings along without honest ‘de novo’ review? Apparently, not even Third Amendment responsibility of the United States Congress can break the bias of particular court systems.
And therein is the substance of the second major controversy: how can judicial activism and rubber stamping based on political/philosophical bias be corrected, if Congress only requests without any consequences to follow when a judge such as Whittemore (the Federal appeals Judge who received the Congressional request) thumbs his nose at the Congress in their Constitutionally authorized oversight of the judiciary?
Terri Schiavo is not going to be saved from death by dehydration through a conflict between the Legislative and the Judiciary. As things are now progressing, Terri will be dead before the controversy could be resolved. And therein is the substance of a third controversy: what’s the damn hurry to execute Terri Schiavo before full de novo hearing can be accomplished? Is it so outlandish to consider that Judge Greer has a bias that has prevented Terri from receiving fair and balance justice? If a de novo hearing concludes that all court rulings have been sound, without new information changing anything of the findings of fact and promotion of truth, Terri isn’t going to flee to some other jurisdiction and thus be beyond the judge executing her after further review. What’s the hurry to put her down without actual Federal de novo hearing?
And therein lies the fourth controversy: political forces are thrashing the issues around for political empowerment; one force with a heavy bias toward granting to one person the right to kill another alive, sensing human being feels their rite, er excuse me, their right is threatened by de novo review that potentially could change the now obvious destiny of an inconvenient human being; Terri, if granted a fair and thorough review, just might get a stay of execution and then be given therapy that would improve her interactions with her environment, and thus embarrass the faction pushing for this inconvenient human to be put down. Surely the other faction, the one wishing to value even the life of a severely disabled woman, realized that further review might confirm what are already the findings, so that faction was willing to risk the ridicule inevitable from the liberal media in their water-carrying for the other political faction.
So how honest is the faction now demanding that Terri be put down and cremated immediately, without a final de novo hearing? And how cold, political, calculating, and stark is the wrong committed by a Federal judge ignoring the oversight request from the Congress of the United States, to yet again rubber stamp the rubber stamps forwarded up from his fellow Florida Judges?
This truly is an historic controversy, but it remains to be seen if the Congress has the loyalty to our Constitution that would follow through in settling judicial tyranny that is killing one severely disabled woman in Florida.
We were just given the cutest three day old baby goat by the neighbors, that needs feedings around the clock. So I guess many would argue we should starve her too?
No, they don't want animals killed - just people.
Right on, and it's also being done in thousands of homes across the US at this very moment.
Goodness. That reminds me of an observation my husband made.
After he heard just one-to-many of the 'husband's rights,' speeches he postured that if MS was trying to have sex with her the ACLU and everyone trying to kill her would be screaming he's attacking her because she cannot have sex without getting her consent. He said if MF said, "She told me she wouldn't want to deny me the pleasure." it would hold water like a sieve.
He said if MS wouldn't (goodness, let us hope so) be able to have sex with her because she's unconcious (sp?) then he d--- well shouldn't be able to try to get her killed.
He's a history buff and this is setting off alarms all over the place in his brain, such as if the mentally disabled are not deserving of constitutional rights (like one of doctor's..I think he's a doctor..is postulating as theory) then they're all at risk for every perversion by every type of predator.
Good one, Tax-chick!
Unfortunately, it's true. No stray dog or convicted murderer could be starved to death as Terri is.
Well and truly stated. AFter reading the ABC polling questions with the preamble for each, it was obvious they had a goal and stilted their poll to reach the goal. It was blatant liberalism on display. And quite ugly.
If I were you, I'd ask the moderator to just *ZOT* me.
Do yourself, and all of us a favor, and just get it over with.
Do it, FRiend: "pull the plug."
</sarcasm>
Now, hopefully you know how to *read between the lines*.
:^)
.
Of course we are. Michael said she wasn't being st arved.
All they wanted to hear was what they planted in their minds.
That's what the mainstream media regards as feedback -- and not the authentic voices speaking to them that they will not listen to, but more importantly, speaking to one another. In their perverted world, that is not allowed. They alone will speak for the people! They will decide what the people think! They are the Anointed Ones.
ping
so am i:>
ping
Your retort was better than a one liner. lol
Thanks for the ping. Hannity, on his radio show, sounds pretty optimistic.
I unequivocally guarantee you that, once this is over, no matter how it is resolved, Congress will go back into its shell: no comments, no action to Greer, Whittemore, or the 11th Circuit - nada. It will remain as it has been for years.
One of the reasons I remain suspicious of MS and his insistence that Terri die, is the report that he also plans to have her cremated. I do not know whether this is an accurate report and if he has ruled out an autopsy, but IMO there certainly needs to be one to dispel any suspicion of foul play. Given the many years that Terri has been physically incapacitated, there must be an enormous amount of medical information to be gotten for the benefit of others. It is sickening that Terri's life hinges on legal gymnastics which in turn are based on the recovered memory of a husband who has all but legally divorced her. MS has reportedly spent more money on lawyers trying to hasten her death than on the rehabilitation Terri was entitled to. I am open to hearing his explanation of events but that still wouldn't mean that Terri should now die when her parents are willing to take care of her regardless.
Michael is conflicted yet the court gives him standing!
One of the issues that concerns me most (aside from the evil of killing a disabled person when they are no longer convenient) is the wall of judicial power erected and maintained by the judges themselves. Whittemore arbitrarily chose to ignore what was in the Congressional bill ... and as a clinton appointee, that is no surprise. But someday, there will be a reverse of this situation, with a very conservative ruling handled simialrly to this sty of judicial rubber stamping. THEN it will be liberals forcing the issue. I want this done now, while saner conservative heads run the House, Senate, and the White House. It is time to resolve this judicial tyranny via Constitutional means.
Legal minded friends have told me that Greer is the one with major conflict of interests AND he is the one who started the stone around Terri's neck formed from rubber stamping by judges. I will address Michael Schiavo's perfidy after Terri is out of mortal danger.
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.