Virginia Postrel is a very intelligent writer and commentator, but she completely missed the mark just now on MSNBC. She said anyone who believes in individual liberty and federalism and separation of powers must side with Michael Schiavo and the court in their insane desire to kill Terri Schiavo.
How, exactly, are these goals met by starving a woman to death? The court ruled. The court is wrong. It would be (not the first) dereliction of duty for the legislature and executive branch not to jump into action.
Just as important as separation of powers, Ms. Postrel, is the idea of checks and balances. The court has overstepped its bounds; the other branches have to step in and make it right.
Though, it saddens and enrages me to say, I’m not confident they’ll be able to do so.
March 19th, 2005 at 12:04 AM
I really agree with you. The thought of a person starving to death in this country because a court rules it just seems barbaric. If she’s not on a ventilator and she’s not on life support but is simply on a feeding tube, then we’re going too far in our qwest. To me, that’s a scary thought. I also have to flip the coin here though, and admit I don’t know what I would do if I were in that situation.
March 20th, 2005 at 11:38 AM
Your comment highlights two of the main errors most of the uneducated are making concerning this situation. First, as you correctly point out, this isn’t a case where “extraordinary means” are being used to keep Terri alive. Giving a disabled person food and water are the least to be expected. Denying them is barbaric.
Second, Not only are we not sure what WE might want done to us in a similar situation, we certainly don’t know that Terri wants to be starved to death. It makes no sense to assume we’re doing her some great favor allowing her to be killed in this gruesome manner.
Thanks for your comments, Moncia.
March 20th, 2005 at 10:24 PM
As it happens, my mother was on a feeding tube for a while this past autumn, recovering from surgery to correct a heart problem. It really isn’t extraordinary at all, just a different way to provide food and water.
March 21st, 2005 at 8:18 PM
I couldn’t disagree more. Fiirst, I believe Michael when he syas that Terri does not want to “live” like this. If I were him and somebody in Washington or OK was trying to tell me they knew what my wife wanted better than I do, I’d be furiuous. I know my wife bettter than anybody, including her parents, and so I’m willing to believe that Michael Schiavo does too. As for coming out of it, come on guys, it’s been 15 years. If I’d been in a comma for 15 years, I’d want the feeding tube removed. Tell you what, Dave. I’ll promise to keep feeding you if promise to stop feeding me.
March 23rd, 2005 at 1:43 PM
I trust for his wife’s sake that Jeremy isn’t drawing any other parallel between himself and Michael Schiavo. In any case, it’s preposterous to claim that he has his wife’s wishes and best interests at heart, considering the other aspects of the case:
1. He stands to collect a large insurance payout once she dies.
2. He’s presently living with his new chick and their two illegitimate children.
3. Her death would close the very open question of how his wife came by her extensive injuries (she had choking injuries on the throat and her femur was broken, for crying out loud!) from a supposed fall in their house.
4. Her death would also close the question of what use was made of the financial settlement made on his wife, and intended for her support.
Not exactly the straightforward issue of Terri’s wishes that the Schiavo camp is making it out to be, is it?
March 24th, 2005 at 12:59 PM
You maniacs are all wrong. The call to commit violence is not surprising. “punch in the neck and kick in the groin”. It all boils down to the privacy of this family to make this decision on their own wothout you religious zealots sticking your sanctimonious noses where they don’t belong. You conservative hypocrits love executing people when it suits you but when the courts of the land make a decision you don’t agree with, you advocate violence. Shame on the whole lot of you and get your religion out of the state so we all can co-exist here!
March 24th, 2005 at 1:18 PM
There are so many things wrong with your post, it’s hard to know where to begin.
1st: learn to differentiate between the parts of the post that are serious and the parts that are meant to be ironic. “Call to violence” indeed. Think, won’t you?
2nd: The decision to kill Terri Schiavo wasn’t a “family” decision by any stretch of the imagination. It was her estranged adulterous husband wanting her out of the picture for his own purposes.
3rd: Government is supposed to step in when an innocent is about to be murdered. The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution wrere written specificaly to secure the God given right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
4th: I like the way you tell those of us with religious convctions to “get out”. If we get out, how can we co-exist. Oh, I get it. Co-exist under your terms. Gotcha. Like the peasantry co-existed with Stalin, right?
5th: You do a lot of name calling for someone who wants to co-exist.
March 24th, 2005 at 6:24 PM
I really don’t see what’s to stop any other man from taking out a life insurance policy on his wife, beating her into a coma, and then dehydrating her to death. It sounds like a plan to me.
March 26th, 2005 at 11:48 AM
No matter what this is a case of premediated murder;we must face that fact.