A court sentenced Terry Schiavo to death today. A Florida judge found the 41-year-old woman guilty of being disabled. Schiavo's defenders even admit the charge against her, so no formal trial was held, no appeals will be heard, and orders staying the sentence have been ignored. She will be the sixtieth person executed by the state of Florida since the Supreme Court reinstituted the death penalty in 1976. Critics protesting the "cruel and unusual" nature of the execution--starvation and thirst--have been ignored. Sure, liberals have been silent about this, but it's not because they are selective in their opposition to cruel and unusual punishment. It's just that since the Supreme Court shot down a Florida case that would have outlawed the electric chair, liberals have been too frustrated to speak out regarding these matters. Arguments decrying the arbitrariness of imposing capital punishment upon Schiavo, who needs just food and water to survive, but sparing Christopher Reeve, who needed machines to live, have fallen on deaf ears too. After all, if the state believes it's okay to execute some people for their disabilities but to keep others alive through research that involves taking human life, who are we to yell "hypocrite"? Although the execution began this afternoon, it's likely to last several days. If you're one of those bleeding-heart types who prays for the guilty, don't forget to say a prayer for all of Ms. Schiavo's victims too.

This is injustice of the worst kind. Wow, this really bothers me, this is nothing better than state-sponsored murder.

Gee, if only John Kerry had been elected - Terri could walk again, but not eat or drink since her "husband" says she wanted to die. This makes me so sick to my stomach it's beyond words.

This is not state sponsored murder. There is a great bit of difference between letting someone die a natural death and killing them. This woman should have been allowed a natural death however many years it was ago that her accident occurred, but modern medicine saw fit to "save" her. Let the poor woman die.

Listen, this is a woman who is suffering as a vegetable every day of her life now. There is a point in everyones life when you can't have a politically minded opinion on something of this nature. This woman is not living, and why anyone would find her death to be anything but justified is sorely mistaken. How many of you have actually witnessed someone go from living a happy, healthy life only to get a disease or have a tragedy strike and become paralyzed? Not many I would guess? I for one had this sort of thing happen to my mother who became a vegetable in front of my families eyes. The trauma this causes is something that can't be explained. Would anyone wont to see a parent or sibling having to eat through a tube for the rest of their life? Not knowing night from day or even having the ability to speak or show any emotion or communication skills. This isn't fair for the husband to watch his wife daily and know that the person he married and loves suffers because people find it morally wrong to end her losing battle. Empathy has to be taken for this man, and from what I have read it was her own wish to be taken off this feeding device. Why fight to keep someone like this alive? Who benifits from her being alive? Certainly not her, her husband or any of her friends and family. I praise the judge in this case for his decision and hope that no other hacks try to get involved to stop this action. Let the pain and suffering end for everyone who is involved in this horrible tragedy.

Obi, what will be done to this innocent woman is reprehensible. Her parents want to give her as many chances as she can possibly have, and her husband wants to let her die. As others have asked, why, at least, not give her the benefit of the doubt?

"Why fight to keep someone like this alive?"

Because of that 1 in a million chance she has to recover. This is a human being we're talking about.

Ben this woman has absolutley zero chance of recovering from this, so your "one in a million chance" is kind of foolish since we should never have those kind of odds stacked against human life. She doesn't even know she is a human being anymore and place yourself in her shoes and honestly tell me that this is the way you would want it to be!

The benefit of the doubt should lean towards natural death. It is the natural state in her case. Why do doctors see fit to patch people together from what would be certain death so that they can drool and eat through a tube the rest of their lives? The combination of the doctor's oath to preserve life and the extent to what modern medicine can do in simply making the body function has created a monstrous situation. People should in many instances be allowed to die.

When a parent's denial of food and water to a child results in the child's death, it's called murder. When a court denies a dependent adult food and water that results in that disabled adult's death, it's called humane. To me, both cases are the same. Pulling the plug is not the same as denying someone food, water, or oxygen. In many cases, the former may be letting nature take its course. The latter isn't. Machines aren't keeing Terry Schiavo alive. Food and water are.

In all fairness, the parents should be able to have a say, eh? I saw footage of tthe woman acutually smiling. Maybe she is in a state of bliss, or happy to be alive? These are possibilities; slight, but still. Being a vegetable is not ideal, but what is the alternative? I guess nobody can definitively say for sure, eh? Another thing, the issue regarding life and death in these particular scenarios is not constrained to "right" or "left" political veiwpoints. It is actually beyond the scope of politics. Our limited understanding (ignorance)of these respective scenarios, or states of being are to blame, regardless of the trivial laws of man. It is unfortunate that so many people are governed by such petty political institutions. There seems to be quite a lacking of philisophical or even spiritual considerations by our society. As recent events that have transpired have shown us, formalized religion has become manipulated, corrupted and misunderstood. The priest pedophilia is just one small example.

Jeb Bush rules

Brother Jeb

"Ben this woman has absolutley zero chance of recovering from this"

Look, that's false. There is always a chance. A former teacher of mine had a daughter born with a rare disease and doctors gave her very little time to live. If I remember correctly, a doctor even suggested doing the equivalent of "pulling the plug" on the baby. Thankfully, they were fiercely opposed, and now (after 7 months) the little girl's health has been improving.

"place yourself in her shoes and honestly tell me that this is the way you would want it to be"

Absolutely kept alive. Since I'm not certain there is an afterlife, I want to stay around as long as possible. As I stated earlier, we must always give people the benefit of the doubt in situations like this.

"Why do doctors see fit to patch people together from what would be certain death so that they can drool and eat through a tube the rest of their lives? The combination of the doctor's oath to preserve life and the extent to what modern medicine can do"

Here's what you're ignoring: You never know when the latest development might arise. Perhaps a month after this woman is dead, some miraculous medicine might be experimented with and proven to aid those in similar situations. You said it yourself -- doctors must preserve life.

well thats your opinion and most certainly one that is easier now than if it was actually happening to you. If you feel that its so important for her to stay alive why dont you go visit her and then tell me how you would feel if this was your wife or you in the hospital bed.

Maury's point, that barring some miracle Schiavo's chances of recovering are zero, is correct. At the same time, Ben L's opposing point, that a bad life is preferable to no life at all, seems on the mark too.

Ben my mother had Multiple Sclerosis and she passed away 15 plus years ago. I have been waiting for a cure to come out during this whole period of time with no success,so how long do you think is fair to wait for the government or the "latest developments" to surface? If feeding tubes and computers are whats keeping me alive I think its fair to say that death is the better option. My opinion that may be,however I have been through it before and I can speak for my mother when I say that she wouldn't have wanted to stay alive because she wasn't quite sure there is an afterlife, that was a crazy and selfish thing to say if you ask me.

"you go visit her"

No

"tell me how you would feel if this was your wife or you in the hospital bed"

Tell me how you would feel if this was your daughter, because Terry's parents already told us.

"Maury's point, that barring some miracle Schiavo's chances of recovering are zero, is correct."

That's what I'm talking about, though, when I say "1 in a million." Everybody knows of situations like my former teacher's, proving that there is always a chance. We aren't machines. (Or are we, Truth?)

Maury, I'm very sorry to hear about your mother.

A fellow musician friend of mine has a best friend who got MS several years ago. He's told me how unbelievably hard it is to see his friend's health deteriorating in such an extreme fashion.

His friend, Ralph Rosa, has been in a wheelchair for a few years now. They've started a charity, the Muscular Sclerosis Research Foundation, which raises money through concerts, comedy shows, and similar means. I've heard some of the developments that have come out of the research, and it's really amazing. You never know when there is going to be a breakthrough.

One more thing...

"If feeding tubes and computers are whats keeping me alive I think its fair to say that death is the better option."

That is your view. My father told me about his first wife's battle with cancer. He stood by her for years, creating huge financial debts and, to a large extent, sacrificing his personal life in order to keep her alive and care for her as long as possible.

This is a very depressing thread. I long to call some asshole a "Buchananite" again.

This is, as Ben L states, a depressing topic. The alternatives for Schiavo are death, or life in a severely brain-damaged state. There is no happy ending here. There's bad and worse.

Dan,
I don't know where to begin. You know that I spend my days encouraging the disabled to live whatever they can however they can. Being disabled myself, I know the challenges that life has for many of us.
This is really several issues in one here.

1. The right to die. The government has no business in this, keep your nose out of it. Jeb, you claim to be conservative? Doesn't that imply personal freedom?
But, that begs the question....WHO'S freedom?
Terry's husband says he doesn't think Terry would want to live like this. Did Terry leave a living will? If, in a living will, Terry said that she would want her feeding tube removed perhaps then I could approve of this action....but as of now, I can't.

In 2003, my wife Raine was in a coma for 5 weeks. Every organ in her body had failed, except her heart. For the first 4 weeks of that coma, there was NO brain wave activity. NONE. Her chances of living were less than 10%. If she lived, her prognosis was grim. Doctors told me that it was time to consider taking Raine off of life support, to let her go "in peace." Who's peace? MINE? The Doctors? The insurance company's?
Instead, I sat there every day, prayed, and read to her, told her awful jokes and sang songs of love. The greatest moment of my life will always be when once, leaning close to her and telling her how much I loved her, I saw the "spark" come back in her eye. Within 3 weeks she was walking and out of the hospital. Yes, she has some lingering problems, but if I had pulled the plug like it was suggested I do, she wouldn't be at my side today.
The point of this?

Doctor's are not God. When they say, "never" they are practicing an art, not an exact science. Every week I see and hear stories of miraculous recoveries from people that e-mail me.

If I had given up, myself, when the doctor told me to, I would not be a professional bowler today.

Ms. Schiavo has a right to live. She did not leave an advance directive, so what her wishes would be we can only conjecture.

But....does the government have any say in this? They shouldn't.

But that belies the second issue. Who has the say now? Is Terry his wife...or his property?

The only solution to this is...IF you think you would want the same death sentece as Terry, by all means...FILL out a living will. Otherwise, you will be at the mercy of doctors, lawyers and judges...all deciding YOUR fate.

But.......more important....believe in miracles. I am one. My wife is a greater one. You never know what will happen.

Be well,

Sponge Daddy

Some people say Terri has no chance of recovering. Recovering from what?! Does a child who is born brain-damaged have a chance at recovering? Probably not, yet that doesn't mean we would kill the child by withholding food. Even though Terri cannot fend for herself, she is still very much alive. She doesn't need a respirator. She isn't on life support. She just needs help, like every infant, like every child that needs guardians that can provide food, water, clothing, and shelter.

Michael Shiavo has no right to remove his wife's feeding tube. Firstly, he has already to my knowledge found another woman; he may even be remarried. Secondly, there was no formal living will. How do we know that Terri wanted to die under these circumstances with absolute certainty? We don't, therefore we should defer to the side that is willing to uphold life. Thirdly, she has two parents and a brother that love her and clearly will do whatever it takes to care for their injured daughter and sister.

Ben-L, we are more than machines. We possess a life force energy that is essentially intangible, however it is the driving force behind our molecular machinery. It provides consciousness in us and in all forms of life. Variable levels of consciousness I might add; different levels in the animal kingdom and different levels within the Homo sapien kingdom! Straight up machines, by and large, are not invoked with this mysterious life force energy. It is evident that Ms. Shiavo's body still contained this life force energy. She displayed emotions; the key aspect of a human experience. I heard on talk radio last night that when they took her feeding tube out, she was aware of this and moaned in discontent. A police officer came in the hospital room to see what was going on...
Oh yeah. On the issue of miracles? Life itself is a miracle. We are all miracles.

Ben thanks for your empathy. This is as Dan said, a very depressing topic. I guess I just have my view on things and obviously I am not the only person who has dealt with a tragic situation after reading Sponge's post. Of course with different diseases there are different occurances and better odds of recovery, so in my mom's case I just know how it was dealing with MS. I cant say that my belief in that matter would always be the same for anyone else. I only know how MS worked and how it sapped the life out of someone. Pulling the plug would hardly be my first instinct, quite the opposite,it would be the very last of my wishes for anyone who was suffering. I don't know if her husband has any selfish memorandom in this whole thing but I just remember how it was in my family and how terrible I felt for my oldman when we would leave the hospital every week. It actually got to the point where I felt worse for him then my mom. He never brought another woman in our home the entire thirteen years my mom clung to life in the hospital and it got to the point where even at my own young age I realized that there was no chance that I would ever have my mother back. Dealing with that was very difficult and I had some crazy days growing up, but as I sat here and read the first few posts it brought me back to visiting my mom in the hospital and realizing that although she was not in pain, it was clearly a better option for her to be spared of such a terrible hand dealt. Watching someone slowly turning into a vegetable is the worst and most painful thing I have ever had to witness in my life, and it is the reason I feel the way I do about this womans situation, because to me it is very similar.

Federal Rules of Evidence says this about hearsay: "'Hearsay' is a statement, other than one made by the declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted."

Thus Terri's "right to die" is based on something that in many other cases might be called hearsay. What we have been really defending, is Michael Shiavo's right to remove a financial burden on his sayso that she wanted to die.

Florida SC's overturning of "Terri's Law" was a ridiculous reactionary swipe by the courts at the other branches to hold onto the power that the courts have commandeered. As the state's attorney said, Judge Greer's decision had been complied with; the feeding tube had been removed.

A law giving the chief executive the power to replace the tube does not change the fact the decision had been complied with. As Connor also went on to say, the only way that it could be considered a unreversable decision is if the judgement was "until death", like "hanged until death".

But it is very telling that no matter how appropriate a judge thinks they are in sentencing a convict to death in a criminal case, we have laws that says the chief executive of state can give reprieves and even pardons. Such cases are a clear example of an executive countermanding the decision of the courts. But since Greer offered no such end goal, it's not even in the same class of "intrusion" as one that we commonly accept.

Instead what the courts argued was that it could take no shows of a lack of confidence from the other two branches. It argued that Greer had been on this case for 6 years, what made the governor think that he could understand the case any better?

It's interesting the basis on which Greer threw the Schindler's case out last time: it's because the Schindler's weren't just doing one thing at a time. They were contesting Mr. Schiavo's right to speak for Terri at the same time that they were trying to get him removed as guardian on the basis of neglect. The judge said it was "confusing" that they were arguing two things at once.

That's great. The FSC argues that Greer should know the case better, but Greer after six years is confused at why Terri's parents were trying to do more than one thing at a time (so that he would consider neither issue) to save their daughter in the face of Schiavo's history of neglecting rehabilitation programs for his wife!

Yay death!

There has been much talk about how the ruling last night is unconstitutional. I was wondering what some of you, who so fiercely wrap yourselves around the constitution as a kind of deified document, think about this. As I've said before, I don't care if the ruling is unconstitutional, because sometimes other factors must be considered. In the civil war, that was the liberation of human beings from bondage. Yesterday night, it was the preservation of one human being's life.

-ben

I think that Congress successfully defended an American from a domestic enemy, the Florida Supreme Court. :D

I don't know about the propriety. But, I'm not a purist. I watched CSPAN last night. I heard some lady claiming to be a Republican cast this as "states rights". Allowing the Florida Supreme Court to ride roughshod over a Governor, legislature, and people united in objection to this so that Greer's reputation can be seen as the most competant source on this for his "6 years" is NOT a State's Rights issue. And that the Florida Supreme Court would not give Connor, the Florida state rep, any allowance for a previous commitment to another trial---something Shindler's council says that she has never seen in 22 years of practicing law.

You have the #1 domestic enemy of the state, Judicial knowitall-ism. I don't feel for one instant I am abandoning high ground in "State's Rights" issue, by saying that the FSC cannot hold the people hostage, just as it should not have usurped the power to judge how an election should be certified outside of established tradition.

What was almost gaffaw-inducing to watch liberals shout "We are a nation of laws!" Don't they believe in a Constitution that "lives" and "breathes" and can pick up and move to San Fransisco if "the village" gets too cold in the winters? To the judicial activists we are a nation of laws that get harder to read and understand what was meant originally by the minute. That's something to base our nation on. Just leave the laws in place, someone will be around to reinterpret them, eventually.

It parallels the way that a lady representative made the argument that the decision belongs to "the family" knowing full well that the courts were enforcing the supremacy of one singular family member in making this decision. "Work it out among the family" really meant, "let the court decide who gets a voice" in this matter.

Sea King - yup, the sudden discovery of the Tenth Amendment by the Democrat party; it had to take something important, like the attempt to abort a 41-year old woman, to make them see the light.

I've heard a few arguments back and forth on this; one casts it as a case where Terri's Fifth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment rights are being violated, demanding a federal remedy.

The ideal would be for Jeb to show a little Andy Jackson and tell Greer that if he wants to kill Terri Schiavo, he can jolly well go through the National Guard to do it. I don't know the law well enough to know if he's allowed, but it would be a sight to see.

"You have the #1 domestic enemy of the state, Judicial knowitall-ism"

His decision is based on law and who is her voice in terms of her legal rights. This falls to the husband based on the law of marriage. The parents have no rights in this case. I honestly and utterly hold my deepest condolensces for their family yet I honestly believe that the decision made by Judge Greer is going to uphold in federal court. I say this based on the fact that the husband by law is the final decison-maker by the binds of marriage. However... I pose another question... Does she not have a right-to-life? I believe she does however the judgement rendered is based on the laws of the land NOT the beliefs of a few! This decision is NOT judicial knowitall-ism. This decision is based on law.

The American public in a ABC/Wash Post poll say that the government should not intervene and that is a move made out of political advantage and not out of her concern. If we do this for her then we must do it for all patients that exist in situations like this. We cannot make one exception and not make a rule.

"In making this difficult decision, a surrogate decisionmaker should err on the side of life… In cases of doubt, we must assume that a patient would choose to defend life in exercising his or her right of privacy."

This was cited from the Browning decision, where there was a clear expression of Browning's intent. Greer cited this decision as the ruling authority. Aparantly though, since Greer doesn't seem to doubt his conclusion, he doesn't have to err on the side of life.

Some of the courts reasoning is that since we became really, really convinced that Mrs. Schiavo would not want to live that way and for that long, we did not err on the side of life.

Thus the courts cite something, just to say that they had that in mind when they went against it, because they were pretty sure they weren't erring.

The Florida legislature, Congress, Governor Bush and President Bush are just enacting that idea of erring on the side of life. If they are erring, it is on the side of life, against the unprovable assumption that Terri would want to die in such a case.

Schiavo's guardianship is at least a tad bit suspicious. First of all he only mentioned Terri's desire to die 7 years into the ordeal, and after he had already one a settlement to use in her care. Second, although Greer finds it innocently misguided, Schiavo did refuse care for an infection, before the current issue came up. But it appeared that the courts erred on the side of the guardian, not on the side of life, however frequently they restated that principle.

The Federal Court held up the ruling as it is applied to laws of the state of Florida hence a "states-right".

"U.S. District Judge James Whittemore said the 41-year-old woman's parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, had not established a "substantial likelihood of success" at trial on the merits of their arguments.
Whittemore wrote that Schiavo's "life and liberty interests" had been protected by Florida courts. Despite "these difficult and time-strained circumstances," he wrote, "this court is constrained to apply the law to the issues before it."" --AP

Is he an activist judge or is he upholding the law of the land?

I say he upheld the law of the land.

BTW -

Truth, I do tend to jump ugly on you, so it's only fair to give you credit here: "Life itself is a miracle; we are all miracles." Excellent.

-NF

Thanks Nightfly

If people could get away from the television set for a good while, we would all realize this...lol

Is he an activist judge or is he upholding the law of the land?

I say he upheld the law of the land.

I would be hardpressed to call a refusal to hear "activist". The words sound pretty convincing to me.

But then again Kennedy didn't start out his Roper opinion with "let me just pull this one out between my cheeks..." The ACLU doesn't say "Let's slap down the people one more time for old time sake." In fact, I would guess that in most cases, they think they have a valid reason for doing what they are doing. I tend to believe that many liberals honestly think they are doing good in a number of situations where I disagree. Disagreement is not about the good guys against the bad guys. Heck in the press, it's usually a fight to establish that there is another take on things.

DO YOU THINK THAT HAD HITLER BEEN GIVEN PSYCHOLGICAL TESTING BEFORE HE BECAME THE LEADER OF GERMANY THAT HE WOULD HAVE BEEN THEIR LEADER?

MR. FELOS SOUNDS LIKE A PERSON WHO NEEDS PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTING FOR PARANOID SCHZOPHENIA.
I AM FOR PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTING FOR LEADERS IN THIS COUNTRY BEFORE THEY CAN TAKE ANY PUBLIC OFFICE. PERIOD.