 Cynthia Tucker |
Posted on 04/03/2005 6:42:45 PM PDT by Gondring
Friends of Florida judge George Greer describe him as a low-key conservative Christian, a Republican, a family man, a dog lover. Appellate courts have found over and over again that Greer simply followed the law in deciding a sad and controversial case. But for that sin, the Pinellas County Circuit Court judge was invited out of his Southern Baptist Church.
|
|
Apparently, Greer's critics, including his pastor, didn't like his rulings in the Terri Schiavo case, which landed in his courtroom in 1998. They wanted him to be an activist judge -- a jurist who ignored the law and ruled according to the passions of a group of partisans.
Ultraconservatives want you to believe the term "activist judge" applies to a group of determined liberals whose rulings have overturned historic precedent, undermined morality and defied common sense. But the controversy that erupted around Schiavo, who died on Thursday, ought to remind us once and for all what "activist judge" really means: a jurist whose rulings dissatisfy a right-wing political constituency.
Over the next few months, you'll hear the term "activist judge" often as President Bush nominates justices to the U.S. Supreme Court. The president could end up appointing as many as four. Chief Justice William Rehnquist, 80, is ailing with cancer; John Paul Stevens is also an octogenarian. Sandra Day O'Connor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg are cancer survivors in their 70s.
With so many likely vacancies, ultraconservatives see an opportunity to drive from the bench any semblance of fealty to the law or the U.S. Constitution. They claim that judges have become the tool of an outlandish liberal fringe that has violated the graves of the Founding Fathers. When right-wing talk-show hosts and U.S. senators denounce judicial activism, they conjure up images of jurists who terrorize the God-fearing, coddle criminals and would -- according to one crazed campaign memo passed around during last year's presidential campaign -- outlaw the Bible.
The next time you hear those claims, think of Judge Greer, whose politics tilt to the right. He is among the targets of ultraconservative ire.
For that matter, think of the current Supreme Court -- hardly a bastion of liberalism. Its justices declined to intervene in the Schiavo case because they could find no legitimate reason to do so.
While the rift between Michael Schiavo and his in-laws, Bob and Mary Schindler, is depressing, family conflict is almost a way of life in America. Courts are called upon often to settle family disputes over money, children and property. Florida law makes clear that a spouse has the right to decide end-of-life issues, and, after testimony from several people, Greer upheld Schiavo's claim that his wife didn't want to be kept alive through artificial means.
It is perfectly understandable that the Schindlers were unhappy with his ruling. As grieving parents, they wanted to believe, contrary to the judgment of several physicians, that their daughter might one day be miraculously restored.
But the attacks on the judiciary by the Schindlers' supporters -- including an attempted end-run by an activist Congress -- made it clear that a minority of religious extremists have no respect for the law and no understanding of the separation of powers on which this government was founded.
Among those who missed their high school civics class, apparently, were Congress and the president. In one of many rulings turning down the Schindlers' request for intervention, an Atlanta federal court judge chastised the executive and legislative branches for overreaching.
"Congress chose to overstep constitutional boundaries into the province of the judiciary. Such an act cannot be countenanced," wrote Judge Stanley Birch, who was appointed by former President George H.W. Bush. Hardly a liberal activist.
The current President Bush has already made clear that his idea of a model chief justice is Clarence Thomas, who has no respect for judicial precedent. But even Thomas might not satisfy the extremists who chastise Judge Greer. They will be satisfied with nothing less than a judiciary steeped in the same narrow religious views they want to impose on the nation.
Cynthia Tucker is editorial page editor for The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. She can be reached by e-mail: cynthia@ajc.com.
Her EEG said "no recognizable cerebral activity" even in response to painful stimuli. Now you explain how someone who has no cerebral activity (consistent with PVS) is able to hold "wishes" and communicate them.
Her latest EEG was done in 2002.
I will ignore the name calling BTW, I am certain it is just that your argument is too weak and you don't know what you are talking about.
I will be as "dumb" as President Bush, Governor Bush, Senator Santorum and the list goes on.
The final review will be coming soon- and don't fret I am not talking about God- I am talking about the people of the United States of America. This is not over yet and Greer will have to answer some questions.
YOU want to force YOUR will on everybody else. There are millions and millions of us. A huge majority. That want the right to have the plug or the tube pulled for ourselves. You can't change that. We will fight you tooth and nail ill the bitter end.
We can both make wills. That's not the point. No one knows what Terri wanted, so they killed her by starving her to death anyway, not even knowing how disabled she really was. They saw her as sub human just because she looked odd.
BTW, did you know it is a felony to starve an animal to death in Florida?.
She told her husband she wouldn't want to live that way. The courts agreed. That's the law. You can put all the words in the world in my mouth and invent my motives for me all you want. It won't make it so. You lost and I thank God above that you did.
Michael did everything possible for four years and then he realized it was time to let her go. That simple. He knew she didn't want to be there ... like that ... so he fought to get money to treat her. He took 300k for himself and had to spend it on lawyers to fight you and the Schindlers and keep body and soul together during a time when he probably couldn't work a lot as he spent a lot of time with Terri.
Your sides attempt to turn MS into a murderer and Greer into a nazzi is proof to me your motives are suspect. I will never ally myself with the 'Christian Right' again. Twenty years I thought of myself as part of the Christian Right. NO MORE>
Absent clear proof that she wanted to die by starvation I'm comfortable that the government failed to protect her right to live.
Recall that the Schindlers and DeLay and others were pointing out that they'd want to keep Mrs. Schiavo's body going even if it were in writing that she didn't want it!
If there was a written will stating that then they would have no ground to stand on.
This is a clear case of a lack of respect for Mrs. Schiavo, and for her husband and their marriage.
I disagree. I see the (two branches of) government respected her right to live absent proof that she wanted to be starved to death. Mr. Schiavo was shown ample respect for his rights all the way beyond her execution by starvation. And as far as lack of respect for their marriage I find it hypocritical to call it a marriage when MS had two children and a common-law wife.
The Left has successfully instigated religious fanatics to shoot themselves in the foot, strengthening Roe, and making them look like hypocrites. :-(
Define "religious fanatics". Show me how they have shot themselves in the foot. Show me how this case has strengthend Roe. I don't think I need to know how you view them as hypocrites.
Incorrect. According to the "facts" of this case, a PVS patient cannot swallow (and M.S.'s doctors testified that she couldn't). So if the court's diagnosis was correct, she could not have swallowed orally administered food.
Our laws recognize that we have the right to decide now that we don't want to have medical care if we get into such a state.
So, if I say today that if I am even paralyzed from the neck down, I want to die, then five years from now I am paralyzed, you would be justified in killing me even if after being paralyzed I say that I want to live? That is what you are saying. If Terri didn't swallow (as the doctors said she couldn't), then she dies naturally. No problem. If she swallows, then the question becomes, does she want to live, or is it a reflex (ignoring that this wasn't possible according to the court)? How do you know? To say that she should be starved even after swallowing is to assume knowledge that you cannot possibly have, to play God. It is also to default to death instead of life, a very sick mentality.
But we'll never know, because the judge didn't give Terri that chance. He ordered her killed (oral food and water withheld), thereby preventing any evidence that his previous rulings had been in error.
Once agin, I ask you, does the government have the authority to withhold food and water from a person? Only by accepting this authority can you say Greer ruled correctly, and by doing so you have expanded the realm of government control. Because if government can control this, it can also set the rules as to when and where it can control it. Which means that government (and judges) now have the power to find that they can withhold food and water (orally) even for non-PVS patients. You have said that this is within their power (because that is EXACTLY what Greer ordered. NO food or water in any form). The law is never narrow; it is always general...
I don't think that's correct about SCOTUS - because the Constitution does not specify the court - and according to Mark Levin's book, "Men in Black" - the Congress can IMPEACH even a SCOTUS judge for misusing "good behavior".
It's time - maybe way past time - to start stepping on these people for these TOTALLY UNCONSTITUTIONAL rulings. And .. those rulings can be considered contrary to "good behavior". By ruling against the Constitution [which they swore to uphold] - the judges have committed BAD behavior.
THESE PEOPLE ARE APPOINTED - NOT ELECTED - AND MUST THEREFORE BE ACCOUNTABLE TO THE PEOPLE THROUGH THE CONGRESS.
OUR JOB: Contact our congress people and compel them to reign in these out of control judges. Yep! The dems are gonna scream. But the screamers don't have much credibility any more.
We must not allow our congress people to shrink back simply from what some idiot dem says - that's just not reasonable - remind them THE DEMS DIDN'T ELECT YOU - WE ELECTED YOU - AND WE CAN UN-ELECT YOU IF YOU REFUSE TO DO YOUR JOB. Be tough!! The times call for it.
The article you link to contains a single quote from what it says was Mrs. Schindler's testimony. That quote stands alone and there is no context given for the statement. I imagine Mrs. Schindler's testimony ran for many pages in the transcript and the meaning of that quote cannot be ascertained without seeing the entire testimony.
For example, what if the exchange went something like this:
Q What did Terry say when the show began?
A She said, you know, her initial reaction was, "Just leave her alone. Leave her. If they take her off, she might die. Just leave her alone and she will die whenever."
Q Did Terry say anything else about it?
A Yes. After some discussion she said she really wasn't sure what she'd want for herself if she was ever in that situation. She said she knew her Catholic teaching would be to stay on life-support but that was difficult for her to accept.
Now, this is completely hypothetical except for the quote from the article you linked to. But it does illustrate the danger of drawing conclusions without seeing the entire testimony. I for one don't know what the entire testimony was and would hesitate to make any conclusions one way or the other without reading it.
As for the article's implication that the statement by Terry Schiavo as recalled by Mrs. Schindler couldn't have happened because Terry was only 11 or 12 when the Quinlan case began in 1975, that is simply a red-herring. Although Quinlan's life support was removed, she remained alive in a coma until 1985. The discussion Mrs. Schindler mentioned could very well have occurred when Terry Schiavo was 17-20 because that would have been during the years from 1980-1983 and Quinlan was in a coma during those years.
What were her wishes? Are you psychic? Did you channel her?
A "mistake" of life can be corrected.
A "mistake" of death cannot.
>> That's not the point. No one knows what Terri wanted,
Not true. The court ascertained with witnesses that she would not want to live in a PVS indefinitely.
>>so they killed her by starving her to death anyway, not even knowing how disabled she really was.
More untruth. Many reputable doctors attested to her extremely damaged brain. Many times. The Schindlers brought in the quack Hamasphar (sp?) who was laughed out of court.
They saw her as sub human just because she looked odd.
BTW, did you know it is a felony to starve an animal to death in Florida?.
We never saw her as subhum. Stop projecting. If there is a court order to starve a sick dog to death it would not be a felony.
Three nurses testified they fed her jello and pudding. The judge of death simply ignored them. He "preferred" the testimony of Michaels hired medical hit men.
And the truth is that George Greer was in a network of Pinellas County old boy politics. Greer, Felos, the former sheriff who is now a state rep, and Mike Schiavo (who works in the jail, county govt) are connected two ways over at least.
It was a conflict of interest enabling at best, and flat out murder at worst.
You avoided the questions, because they go to the heart of the matter. Greer didn't just order the feeding tube removed, he ruled that no food or water could be provided to Terri Schiavo, not even orally. Did he have the authority to do that? And if a court does, what restricts it from ordering this in cases where the patient is not PVS (as the law gives him NO authority to order any such thing in the first place)? That is the elephant in the living room. That is the unbridled expansion of government power. How do you answer that (if you can)?
I think this is a huge win for conservatives. Even the very liberal leader of the disability movement said she'd prefer people like Bush in charge of her life than the Lucifer lefties.
People ran to get living wills, and I very much doubt they asked to be starved to death for 14 days if they ever became disabled.!
Terri didn't have PVS.
I know you believe this but it is willful ignorance. You have to believe it to support your deluded political stance.
She was most certainly in a persistent vegetative state. You have to belive that all the doctors and the judges are inhuman monsters to reject this fact. I know you do but you are wrong.
Why should you have the right that Terri did not have? Why do you get to choose to die or not and Terri did not? This is not a right to die case. This is a right to kill case and we will fight you tooth and nail as well.
I had a girlfriend with cerebral palsy, a best friend with muscular dystrophy, taught high school special education, and have counseled those who were facing their death (yes, within hours). But none of them have had flat EEGs, so the experience is irrelevant.
So tell me how many of those people you worked with were flat EEGs. How many were diagnosed as being in a PVS?
Recall that the only two doctors who examined Mrs. Schiavo and thought she might not be in a PVS were a radiologist who couldn't define PVS or differentiate it from a coma, and a quack who advertises in National Enquirer (although being disciplined by the Florida Board of Medicine was overturned on appeal in 2004).
All the credible neurologists thought she was.
I didn't have to 'channel' anybody. The court determined with witness what her wishes were.
You reject the court. You reject everything. Thank God your side is losing political power daily through this gushing wound you have inflicted on yourselves.
I believe in the Golden Rule. Do unto others as you would have done unto yourself. I would not wish on anyone what you tried to do to Terri Schiavo.
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.