« Free speech for me but not for thee | Hidden payments to Kojo »
September 17, 2005

Terri Schiavo: an inconvenient woman

By

Tom Joseph writes us:

It seems to me Steve Feinstein may have missed the big point.  Sometimes, we spend so much effort analyzing something that we pass by the most common sense answer.  Reminds me of the day the network printer went down.  When I arrived on the scene, there were about a half dozen very savvy people discussing how to trace down the software problem.  They were not amused when I asked them if it was plugged in.  They were even less amused when I moved the printer away from the wall and reconnected it to the network.  Flashing lights didn't mean it was completely connected.  While they were standing there with their mouths open I went back to my office to resend my print job to the printer.
 
What if the real problem is not knowing whether Terri Schiavo could improve with new methods of therapy and better care than custodial care?  Think how scary that could be to Judge Greer and the rest of the Florida judiciary.  A woman conscious enough to point a finger at a bunch of judges who worked together to kill her is the last thing they would want.  It is also apparently the last thing they want to allow to happen.  After more than a decade, it is really illogical not to use more testing to verify the diagnosis that the judges and her husband accept.  There are more than enough experts who have questioned the diagnosis and the prognosis to compel a reasonable person to seek additional confirmation of her condition.  We are talking about a life or death decision.  Since more testing poses no harm to Terri, then why are they so afraid of it?
 
As for the Federal judiciary, it's possible that the case faces the same problem.  The Supreme Court has refused to hear this case several times.  Does anyone think the Justices want their decision to be proven wrong?  Terri's biggest problem may be the judicial arrogance that seems to be growing within our judicial systems at all levels.  Think about this.  The Supreme Court has ruled that burning an American Flag is protected free speech.  That acts of prostitution in the production of pornography is protected free speech.  That trying to prevent children from getting access to pornography on the internet voilates free speech.  But when Members of Congress, who take an oath to recognize the Constitution as the law of the land, pass the McCain — Feingold Bill to limit political free speech, Justices on the Supreme Court, who also take an oath to recognize the Constitution as the law of the land, can't seem to find how it violates our free speech.
 
Now, help me get this straight.  It's Terri Schiavo who's in the coma?  A vegetive state they say?  In that case, there are a lot of people worse off.  Maybe, we should stop feeding them all.  Hitler did in 1940, and 200,000 people with mental, pyscological and physical handicaps were relieved of their burdensome lives.  He didn't think their quality of life was worth saving and certainly didn't want to pay for their care.  This was their final solution, but just the start of Hitler's final solutions.
 
Those, who arbitrarily fix a level for the quality of someone else's life, should remember all those things they cannot fix once they are done.