a mild retort
There’s no doubt that the case of Terri Schiavo is an extremely tough and sensitive situation for everyone to look at. We can all have anecdotal stories about what one might do in such a situation or compare it to situations we’ve already encountered. That’s getting away from the matter at hand. And in this case, it is my belief that husband is trying fulfill the wishes of his wife and it seems some, including our Federal government, are denying him his right to do so. And in this situation (not what if the husband was beating his wife, not what if the husband was attempting to go against the explicit wishes of his wife, not what if whatever other slippery slope herring you wish to throw into the discussion) the husband has the right to decide.
Before I’m derided as a heartless, God-less, socialist, elitist liberal, let’s indeed get the facts straight. I’ll point you to two sites which you can determine what you’ll accept as facts. I culled my information and formed my opinion on the matter using information I got from this site. Others have chosen to rely on this site. Take what you want from either. But for me, my opinion is that this situation has gotten way out of hand and clearly illustrates the danger of allowing emotions to usurp rationale. And most definitely just how egregious our politicians have become.
Josh, technically, I suppose she isn’t “brain dead”. I used the term in my layman’s opinion. To be factual correct, she’s severely brain damaged. However call it what you will but observe the following statement of her condition.
Her brain had suffered enormous damage from the heart attack. As time passed, her brain further deteriorated -- to the point where much if not most of her cerebral cortex (the portion of the brain that controls conscious thought, among other things) was literally gone, replaced by spinal fluid. Doctors hired by Terri's husband say the deterioration of Terri's brain left her without thoughts or feelings, that the damage is irreversible, and that Terri's life-like appearance is merely the result of brain stem activity -- basically involuntary reflexes we all have. An independent doctor hired by the court reached the same conclusions. Doctors hired by Terri's parents did not dispute the physical damage done to Terri, but they claim there are new therapies that could improve her condition. In two separate trials, the trial court found such claims of potential improvement to be without merit. Terri's body continues to function without her cerebral cortex. She is sustained by a feeding tube surgically inserted into her stomach. She cannot eat through her mouth without a strong likelihood of choking to death.There’s literally a hole in her head that’s not going to grow back, no matter what miracle treatments are out there (barring miraculous advances in stem cell research… sorry that was a dig, I apologize). And it’s not that eating is “too difficult”. It’s she can’t do it. Hence the feeding tube. Which, I would say, qualifies as extraordinary medicinal care in keeping her alive. There’s no other way to sustain her. As for the assertion the husband is a jackass. That may well be true but he has not remarried. He was or is engaged and has started another life (at the behest of Terri’s parents when they lived together so he says), true, but never remarried. He could have easily divorced Terri and moved on. But he didn’t because he firmly believes it is his wife’s wishes that she not continue to live in such a manner. For seven or eight years he DID get her physical therapy and tried everything possible to bring her back. It didn’t happen and he came to the conclusion that she wasn’t going to return and it was time to let go. But the parents, selfishly, wouldn’t have it. Regarding the issue of where to draw the line, sadly it should have been Terri’s decision. It’s not for us to decide what’s an acceptable quality of life for someone. I can’t say, jeez I think your life really sucks, I’m going to cap you and put you out of your misery. It’s not up to “us”. It was up to her. But, in the absence of any explicit declarations on the matter by her we are left with the person who would have known her best at that point in her life which would be her husband. And according to law he has the say in what happens to her. Had she not been married, then the next of kin would have the final say according to my understanding of the law anyway. This has nothing to do with determining a proper quality of life and ending it if we deem it unfit for a person. I’d say the proponents for her death aren’t necessarily as craven as they are made out to be by the proponents for her life. The reasoning for her death isn’t arbitrary and again it isn’t ours to make.
Josh I don’t think the questions you posed are of any relevance and certainly not applicable to the discussion. Caring for a newborn or even a mentally handicapped person is in no way similar to the caring of a body with no cognitive function. In the case of your brother, had he been severely brain damaged or unable to live without a ventilator or feeding tube what would his decision have been for his life? And if it was then your decision or his wife’s how long would you have sustained him in that fashion with no cure for his situation? A month? A year? Fifteen years? For as long as you live?
But Josh your question is valid if not a little misapplied in this case. Where do we draw the line is these cases of right to die? Although in this case, the line was moved many times because some objected to where it was drawn by the courts.
As for my amusing distaste for the actions of my United States Senate, House of Representatives, and sitting President no Brian I cannot show you where Congress has the explicit power to “lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises to Pay for Education, Healthcare, Forced Retirement Savings, Forced Severance Pay (Unemployment)” However, I can direct you to the rest of that section – “ Clause 1: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;”.
The operative words, emphasized for easy reading, being “General Welfare”. Brian, I know it’s popular tactic with those yahoos you like to listen to all day long on the radio, but again please refrain from putting words in my mouth and making my arguments for me. Can you show me where in the Constitution it is illegal for Congress to take my money and spend it on regulating labor, education, maintaining a national infrastructure, mitigating an impending energy crisis, or dealing with foreign threats (real or convoluted)? You can’t. Why? Because it’s the interpretation of what is considered for the “general welfare” of the Nation. Oh and I like how you slipped social security, welfare, unemployment benefit and Medicare/Medicaid in there like I was all for that. Can I not believe some things are worth being taxed for the greater good and some things are outright theft of my fruits of labor? Can I approve of some things without having to be for everything? A la Carte is unacceptable? Would that make me wishy washy? A flip-flopper? Having no resolve?
I believe there are some things worth the effort of the government to regulate and truly promote on a national scale and yes to levy taxes to pay for such programs because they would truly be for the general welfare of the nation. One I strongly believe is in education. I can’t say the government has been the greatest at it thus far, but it hasn’t really put all that much effort into it either. Like I’ve stated before, a strong basic education could be a silver bullet for many of the issues we face today. The other issues I mentioned, I believe are also necessary for the general welfare of the Union and/or for National Defense. But I liked how you made it sound like I was also all for Social Security, Welfare, unemployment and subsidized healthcare. I do believe in a modicum of socialized services for supplementary assistance, however not to the bloated excess and outright theft it has become today. And as much as you like to believe having a completely laissez-faire government would be the best situation, it would not and has been proven so in our own history. But the failing of our Government is not the fault of the politicians it’s the fault of the people. You are correct that the people have failed to understand and continue to live in a self-imposed state of ignorance when it comes to the function and powers of our Federal government.
I say the Constitution is a framework and serves the foundation on which to build our Government. It is living and breathing and yes I took civics and I’m aware of that amendment process thingy. However, the framers of the Constitution wanted the “will of the people” nowhere near the Constitution. Most of the time the will of the people is a farce because more often than not most people are misinformed, under-educated, and biased when it comes to serious issues that could be addressed and the Constitutional level. Its why we have these things called jurisprudence, precedents and courts to deal with the finicky component of the people’s will. As for the Government doing whatever it wants, well whose fault is that? Additionally, there’s a reason why we haven’t enumerated every single right and allowed powers either. Look at the IRS tax code and witness what happens when government tries to get down to the nitty gritty and in convoluted legalese no less. No.
»Comments (2)
Sunday, March 20, 2005
The GOP has lost its mind… and pulling us down with them
Why won’t they let her die? The case with Terri Schiavo has gotten completely out of control. This woman has been brain dead (i.e., NO HIGER BRAIN FUNCTION) for FIFTEEN YEARS. The only thing keeping her alive is the feeding tube. There is NO recovery for her. I thought it couldn’t get more ridiculous when the Florida governor overstepped his authority to force the feeding tube not to be removed, but now the Federal Legislative branch is trying to push an ultra conservative opinion on the matter?
I t sounds cruel to say let her die, but it is vastly more cruel and unusual to keep taking this woman’s feeding tube out for a few days and then putting it back. It’s way more cruel to keep this woman alive because of selfish parents unwilling to face the facts and let their daughter go. It’s certainly cruel to do so against her wishes (if the husband is to be believed). It’s far more cruel and unusual to pretend and say to this lady’s parents that the federal government can do something about this when in fact it has no jurisdiction over the case (well, shouldn’t anyway). The Florida courts have determined that she should be let go. Her husband has the legal right to relay her wishes in this situation. He says she wanted to be let go. And he, according to my understanding of legal rights, has the overriding say in what should be done.
What the ultra conservative right has initiated goes far beyond simply abusing governing power. They are outright assaulting the very Constitution of these United States. They are in fact trying to rewrite the role of government to do what they screamed the government should have no right doing, being all up in our private lives. These same Republicans the trumpeted State’s rights and the “sanctity of marriage” are now throwing out Florida’s decision on the matter (not to mention the completely ignoring the judicial branches rulings) and saying the husband’s say is irrelevant. WTF.
I hope the population finally wakes up and realizes what was put in power. This is how Republicans won the House. This is how they won the Senate. This is how they won the Presidency. They took “moral” issues and put them front and center. Issues far less important in the realm of governing than say, national defense, national infrastructure, national debt, the Federal budget, education, global economics, world leadership things the FEDERAL government needs to concentrate on. They played to base sensibilities, allowing emotional issues and the subsequent emotional response to dictate how people should vote throwing caution, rationality and necessary intelligence out the window. With all the things our Federal government should be focusing on; a sky-high budget that will most likely elicit more record deficits, a broke ass Social Security system, a crumbling national infrastructure, a pending energy crisis, a deteriorating educational system, a way too porous national border, not to mention all that stuff overseas say nuclear threats, a growing economic superpower that will rival us, and that guy Bin Laden, THIS government is fighting over one lady who should have died a long time ago and making Mark McGuire look like a punk. Again, WTF.
For too long the public has been too lethargic about the Federal government and now it has become a farce full of pomposity and self-interest sacrificing the general welfare of the nation. God help us if we, no, if the ignorant masses continue to allow this brand of governing to continue.
»Comments (3)
Wednesday, March 09, 2005
JET gone wrong?
Okay, some of you out there have been subjected to my expressed desire to travel. Sometimes I think I’d just depose myself from everything here and set off wandering the world. I thought for a bit I’d do one of those teach English in a foreign country stints. While I was in Taiwan a couple of years ago I ran into two Americans from Seattle who decided to teach English. They didn’t know any form of Chinese dialect. They just up and decided to live in Taiwan for a couple of years and travel around the Orient. Teaching was a good way to greatly subsidize the travel and living expenses. So I thought, maybe that would be a way for me to head out and see some of the world on the cheap. Then I heard of the JET (Japan Exchange and Teaching) program. Awesome! Make a decent amount of money and hang in Japan for a couple of years. Good deal right? Well maybe not so much…
Reading over a quasi-journal put up by a current “jet”, you can understand why “those crazy Japanese” comes quickly to mind. But then again it may be because junior high kids are universally crazy. Throw in a foreign country and “quirky” cultural differences then things can become just outright weird. Read for yourself. Can’t be sure on the veracity of the episodes, but according to the editor, he couldn't make this stuff up if he wanted. Fun reading nonetheless.
»Comments (0)
Thursday, March 03, 2005
the MJ conundrum
Okay, while examining my musical tastes I’ve come to a bit of a problem. What do I do about my appreciation of the sonic stylings of Monsieur Jackson?
If the King of Pop is found guilty what of my continued listening to his music? Do I completely disavow any involvement of and repent for my many past hours of jamming to… ahem… Smooth Criminal? But Man in the Mirror, Remember the Time, Billie Jean, Thriller, The Way You Make Me Feel and so on. I mean I was even going to pick up The Ulitmate Box Set. But then I would be supporting a convicted sex offender. And well that wouldn’t be right at all.
Or can I rationalize my continued listening? Despite the artist does the artwork remain untouchable and separate from the deviance of its creator? Aren’t the true originals always a bit crazy? But even if not found guilty, there still remains the question of did he or didn’t he. And will my colored desire to believe he didn’t be enough of a mitigating factor to ignore the question and pretend the music is still all right.
Can we separate the man from his work? Because if so much of him is in his oeuvre, how much of it could be in support of his lurid actions? Perhaps a more critical look at the lyrics may reveal a more disturbing theme than switch-bladed dancing gangs or confirming if Annie is indeed OK.
»Comments (0)
Tuesday, March 01, 2005
hold my whopper?
Okay I’ll admit it. I’m a HUGE Darius Rucker fan. Yeah I’ve got almost all of “Hootie’s” albums and a GREAT bootleg CD featuring some live performances of his covers. But when I saw the above advertisement for Burger King’s new bacon cheddar ranch concoction… well I think I broke something.
If you haven’t seen it, the capture featured is of a Burger King commercial starring Darius clad in a Back to the Future III1950s-esque, purple cowboy getup strumming and shilling along to the tune of Big Rock Candy Mountain. I mean I was stunned. Was Darius in dire financial straits? Was he a little buzzed when he agreed to this? Was he trying to drum up some publicity for his solo debut? What in the world!? I was so discombobulated, I’m not sure if I missed the subtle satire, if there was any such intent, or was this just the horrid product of a fried marketing major that had one too many lines (the powdered variety) and suddenly remembered that whack-assed dream he or she had during the formative years at NYU. And I’m not sure, but I think there are some other cameos in the spot.
Dude, Darius does someone need to hold your hand?
»Comments (1)