Posted on 03/28/2005 7:09:05 AM PST by amdgmary
By the time you read this, Terri Schiavo may well be dead, and America will have taken the next step down the road to democide. While the brothers Bush may not have found it within their executive powers to prevent a woman from being legally starved to death, they did manage to con an entire nation into thinking that they did not act because they could not.
This is most unfortunate, because it is quite clear that neither George Bush nor his brother Jeb ever had any intention of saving Mrs. Schiavo from death by starvation. Like Pontius Pilate, they engaged in meaningless political machinations intended to deflect the blame from themselves while pretending that they were helpless to act. A simple executive order from either man would have sufficed to see the woman fed; the notion that the president has too much respect for either the 10th Amendment or the separation of powers doctrine to act is simply laughable.
For you see, George Bush has yet to veto a single law on the grounds that it requires exercising a power not specifically granted to the United States by the Constitution; instead, he has lobbied hard for many such unconstitutional laws. The Constitution gives the federal government no power with regards to children being left behind, for example. And every IRS tax court, every Justice Department immigration court, is a far greater violation of the separation of powers than the insertion of a feeding tube into a starving woman's stomach.
As for Jeb Bush, it's hard to know precisely what his position is since he's been hiding out ever since the Florida Legislature decided that it's down with offing the disabled. Considering the number of elderly concentrated in the Sunshine State, you'd think the Florida voting public would be paranoid about anything that might conceivably lead toward eradicating the useless eaters of society, but then, I suppose someone's got to play on all those golf courses.
Which leads us to what this affair is really all about. This is not a Democrat or Republican thing – many of the pro-starvation judges have been Republican appointees – it is a demographic thing. Already, the elderly soak up a staggering amount of national resources, as the blessings of technology allow them to live longer while turning them into wrinkled chemical cyborgs. This would be unobjectionable to anyone, except for the fact that the elderly are not paying for most of the expense of their much-needed medical treatments, and they are collecting Social Security for many more years than anyone previously envisioned.
The move to health maintenance organizations 20 years ago essentially sealed the doom of the elderly. It is already a well-established fact that when the health of an individual is at odds with the profitability of these government-mandated corporations, the individual is out of luck. This trade-off, writ large, serves as an example of what we can expect to see over the next 30 years when the "right to die" will become the "responsibility to die" and quality of life becomes a legal question to be determined by Department of Health bureaucrats instead of a pallid excuse to justify high taxes in certain locales.
It won't happen overnight. Schiavo simply represents the first nibbling about the margins. But soon will come the Fox News debates about the terminally ill and the mentally disabled – if an Alzheimer's patient can't even recognize his own daughter, is he really there anymore? It's customary to dismiss slippery slopes as a false form of hypothesis, but when there's both historical and international models that are obviously being followed, we're no longer talking about possibilities, we're looking at time frames.
And eventually they'll get around to the cripples and the Jews. This is an inspired evil that stems from a supernatural source whose inhuman goals are always the same: death, division and destruction. If you don't see how these things connect, recall that it was Jesus Christ who said: "I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me."
Keep that in mind the next time you're trying to decide if your government is on the side of the angels or not.
Thank you. All I hear are people yelling for "big Brother" to have less control ... until it's something they want ... then, by all means, interfere or we'll say you are cowardly.
Christopher Reeve could speak for himself and clearly express his wishes. There's no parallel to the Schiavo case.
Sadly, I don't think they would have. Do you know how few people there were standing outside that hospice? I went down there on Saturday and I was shocked to see how few people cared enough to be there, and I am not surprised at polls that indicate that most people are in favor of killing Terri.
Granted, public opinion is being heavily manipulated by the pro-death crowd, but I still don't think it's anywhere near as solidly in favor of Terri's life as we would like to think. Just look at FR - lot's of pro-death people have been posting here.
Last day March 28, last day
all with designated birthdays please report to renewal center.
Last day....
(/s)
It shouldn't hinge on whether one can speak. If the wishes are clear, they're clear. If not, the mistake should be made on allowing another full review of the facts. Hopefully there are not three people in my life or history that would sign affidavits saying I wanted something I did not want (oh, and signing those affidavits years after the fact). There are plenty who cannot speak, so,,,they die?
Well for my sake, when I turn 60 the process of turning my body into energy will be a lot more efficient. Well I'm off to get my SOMA ration and hop on the next auto-gyro to the party.
Abortion has contributed to our lack of funding in SS.
If that makes me a Bushbot... than so be it... but God did not want us to kill. That is why he listed it in the 10 Commandments...
Your observations on the judiciary are spot-on!
there are many new DU undergrounders who have came to our site.... guess they have nothing to contribute on their move onnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn and onnnnnnnnnnn website.
When the law is bad, and those who are charged with enforcing the law have become a rogue element, how on earth will further ignoring the law help?
You have to fix those things and in order to fix them you need to have the law in place to do it. If you destroy the law (as the judical branch is attempting to do) this country will decend into anarchy.
What law would ever stand if the executive of a state or the President of the United States, ignored the law? What about their oath to uphold the law? Is that convienently overlooked? Did it mean nothing? Are we to expect in the future that other Presidents can safely ignore the law? Where would that lead?
And if they went in guns blazing, more people would have died. The Democrats would have had a field day with that, would have played up the "causing death to save a life" card, alienated Congressional Republicans to the point where they most certainly would back off the nuclear option on the judges, and probably found a current to ride in order to gain control of the Congress in '06.
It's easy to be emotional and say what we would LIKE to have seen happen. It's quite another to see the broader picture and ramifications such actions would have on our future ability to move our agenda forward.
Right now, more than ever, it is essential for us to stick together and to avoid throwing Republicans over the side because of perceived failures. To do so is to ignore that situations can change and is to commit ourselves to the liberal agenda before we have even truly begun to fight.
Put the blame where it belongs--the MSM, and stop eating your own. Do everything within the law that you can to defeat the MSM.
I see this as an obvious flaw in the law that allows a "husband", who has been spawning with another woman for seven years, to be the sole decision maker when it comes to ending his estranged wife's life - at the horror and grieve of her loving parents.
Well said!
The issue, certainly, is whether Terri ever expressed her wishes prior to her injury, but that has nothing to do with Christopher Reeve's type of injury and there's no analogy.
You said, "If the wishes are clear, they're clear," and that's exactly how the cases differ. His were, hers weren't, and that's how the courts got involved.
Exactly right.
It is for that reason that we must avoid turning on our own right now and stick together. We are almost in the position where we can begin making dramatic judicial reforms to stop injustices like this Schiavo debacle from happening in the first place.
If we back off now, we might not get a second chance.
Just thinking the same thing this morning about the dog and pony show and how cowardly they acted. Remember the old man used to be called a wimp. I am so ashamed of this country to the point I don't think I would defend it anymore. I do like the tag Democide. I have changed the words murder and kill to Greer like in "To Greer a Mockingbird or Dressed to Greer or Grerr at 1600 Penn"
Justice used to be blind. Now it is dead.
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.