[Peace-discuss] Liberals and Schiavo

[C. G. Estabrook]

It's surely not correct to contend that Terri Schiavo was dead before the
state killed her.  Infants and people asleep don't "express desire" or
"maintain a system of communication" in the senses you mean, Brian.

"...the tube was removed, and nature took it's course..."?  If I don't
feed my six-month-old, nature will take its course, too -- and that too
would be murder. --CGE


On Thu, 31 Mar 2005, Brian Hagy wrote:

> 
> I agree and disagree with Carl.  I agree that Schiavo wasn't dying.  
> It's hard for the dead to die.  Her ability to choose, to express in
> any form any desire, died 15 years ago.  Numerous people have
> clinically observed her for 15 years, and not one of them ever brought
> forth the remotest hope that she was attempting to choose or make a
> decision.  Life, by my definition, revolves around that core ability,
> that of decision making, in whatever form by whatever means.  For me,
> since Schiavo no longer indicated the ability to make a decision, she
> was dead (brain dead, if not in body...and not even in a zombie way,
> because the folklore of zombies is that even they make choices...what
> to eat, etc.) I disagree with Carl because she was dying, as is
> everyone who is ever born.  Living is the ability to draw out the
> dying process for as long as possible.
> 
> For me, the issue is not whether Schiavo should or should not have had
> the feeding tube taken out (or for that matter, put in), but whether
> or not the government should be involved at all in the death process.
> 
> Ok, the right to LIFE liberty and the pursuit of happiness is
> protected by the government (but somehow the pursuit of happiness
> deosn't apply to gays and lesbians, it seems).  but the right to life
> shouldn't override the equally necessary right to die fact of life.  
> the tube was removed, and nature took it's course.  i would say "God"
> took her, but from my religious eyes, "God" took her 15 years ago, and
> man interfered with that.
> 
> Folks who know me know that i am intensely involved with disability
> rights.  i have dedicated 11 years of my life to supporting people
> with developmental disabilities, including individuals diagnosed as
> "severe and profound".  The difference for me between "severe and
> profound" and "persistant vegetative state" is that "severe and
> profound" individuals maintain a system of communication, in their own
> form, and are able to repeat it.  folks diagnosed as in a "persistant
> vegetative state" do not.  In spite of what I have read, this for me
> was not a disability rights issue.  It was a government involvement
> issue.  The "culture of life"  rhetoric coming from the federal
> institution makes zero sense if held against invading Iraq.
> 
> Ok, nuf said from me.
> 
> 
> 
>