Save Terri, Save America

"I'm waiting for the outcome before I judge Jeb. I've seen him and the rest of the real conservatives in government do a lot - but now it's come time for Jeb to make a decision. This will ultimately determine his future in politics, as without the religious right backing, he has no hope."

Ann Coulter, as a constitutional lawyer, published a good article today outlining the legal ground that Governor Bush has to save the life of Terri Schiavo. He could defy the lawless judiciary and send his marshals to see that Terri gets what she needs, in accordance with the expressed will of the people. Will he?

We are witnessing the results of an out-of-control judiciary destroying the very idea that government derives its power from the consent of the governed. Both the Florida legistature and the US Congress has passed laws attempting to save this woman. The judiciary has seen fit to totally disregard these laws passed by our elected representatives. Now we see the creation of a government by an unelected judiciary.

If Governor Bush allows this travesty to go forward during his tenure, then I, for one, will never consider him fit to run for another office. Besides, what does he have to lose anyway? He's already said he's not running for president. And he already has more money then he knows what to do with. It's times like these that people like himself, that God has put in positions of authority, should act to do the right and moral thing over all other considerations.

I hope this is just a footnote in history. But from what I can tell of this case, it's setting a very bad legal standard that future cases may be guided by. From what I hear from the judge and people who are killing Terri, this case is about two things: Terri's wishes and the prospects of Terri improving. I think the weaker side of human nature has taken over the law in this case. When the pro-euthenasia people are questioned about the lack of evidence that starvation truely was part of Terri's wishes so far I have not seen them present any solid evidence, and that question is met with "well, the judges found adequate proof that this was Terri's wish." Yet, unless there is some key bit of information not being reported, those condemning her to death have not judged this case based on proof of Terri's wishes but have boiled this down to finding evidence that Terri's condition has or can improve, which is not only a subjective judgment but has nothing to do with what Terri wants.

Living wills have suddenly become the hot topic. But if you believe you'd want to have a feeding tube removed if you were in such a condition, this case shows that you don't have to worry about putting it in writing. You only need it in writing if you think you'd want to be kept alive and you don't trust your spouse to make the right decision on your behalf. But then even the question of such personal wishes gets rediculous. Ask anyone and they'll say they wouldn't want to live in such a severely disabled state. It would just plain suck. But can anyone honestly say how they would feel once in that state? Even if you had a legal signed statement saying you would want to be dehydrated to death, you may feel very different about the situation when you're actually in it. You may actually adjust to your new state and discover that you're even more glad for every day you get than when you were able. Who knows...

Didn't intend to start a firestorm. I just think this will go the way of Elian Gonzalez. Laws will be passed and the news will jump on the next sensational story. Michael Jackson is still in the wings for the news to stampede towards just as soon as Terri fades away in the mind of the general public.

And she will fade; just watch it happen.

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.