Logic

I’d better get mine.

Terry Schiavo’s case is one that most closely resembles the abortion issue....the two sides are arguing apples and oranges. One side is arguing that the situation is beyond cruel, and that the woman should be given the right to live and try to recover (That is laudable and I agree with it). The other side is arguing that the Congress and the federal government should not be involved (which I agree with, in principle).

I am going to address these issues one by one.....click below to read on.

Last night, I attempted to post this article, but the computer siezed up and crashed....I lost four friggin’ pages of good blogging....even after I saved it to Word, it didn’t recover. Therefore, you are getting Version 2.0 of this entry....and it pisses me off, because I go off the cuff much better than I rehash. However, to the task at hand.

Section 765 is the Florida Code section that deals with all of this. You can read the whole thing here. To begin with, and maybe most importantly, Section 765.401 states that the spouse, above all others (save an appointed guardian), is the primary decision-maker for someone that cannot make a decision for themselves, AND who hasn’t specifically made a choice of guardian. Section . That’s why you hear this bandied about so much, and why Michael Schiavo is using the term, as well as the MSM. It’s also why the parents are arguing so loudly, and trying to show, that Terri is responsive. If she can be found to be responsive, then she isn’t in a “persistant vegetative state”, and Michael Schiavo would not be able to pull the plug, so to speak.

Who defines if she is in a PVS? Well, the court said that the medical information showed it beyond a reasonable doubt. That’s fine, and it’s the reason we hear the PVS tag line...it gives Michael Schiavo legal cover.

So...here we are. I am of the opinion that Michael Schiavo has the right, under Florida law, to do what he is doing, and, given the COTSF and the COTUS, Congress is overstepping it’s bounds. I’m no lawyer, but I say that the laws, as written in Florida, support the court’s decision.

That doesn’t mean I am blind to the fact that Michael Schiavo may be a dirtbag scum-sucker. It is interesting to see in the timeline of things that he began to change his mind about Terri’s rehab after he received a settlement of over a million dollars (if you hit the link, hit the “Timeline” button on the left). It is interesting that he will not turn over custodialship to the parents. Do I know that he is in it for his own reasons? No. Is the report of her bone injuries interesting? Yes, because from what I know, it shows more than what could be expected from CPR (why would she have a “..history of trauma..” and a compression fracture of her femur?).

There are a lot of questions here, but it’s apples and oranges. There is a legal question (is Michael Schiavo allowed to do what he is doing?), and a moral question (SHOULD Michael Schiavo do what he is doing?). What do I think?

Well, as I have said before, there is a difference between what is morally right and what is legal. Take Gay Marriage, and marriage in general. To a practicing Catholic, homosexual marriage is wrong....but, if the Jasminlive people in this state (Ohio) were to vote it into practice, it would be legal. Laws do not necessarily reflect the moral code of the majority. They come close, but they don’t always match. Divorce is also legal, but sinful in the eyes of the Catholic Church.

If Terri is viewed as able to be terminated because of her condition, what other conditions could be defined as also being able to be dealt with through state-sponsored starvation and dehydration. It is true that we would not do this to an animal without a massive uproar. It does seem that this is another step in defining non-perfect life as ‘inconvenient’. Will we fight to murder crippled people next? What conditions must one have in order to avoid having their food and water taken away?

it is also marked that the liberals, the ACLU, and almost every leftist body and organization in the Western world think that Michael Schiavo is right and just in doing this. That sets off alarms in my book. Big alarms.

So, to conclude, I believe that the legal burden has been satisfied, even though I have grave thoughts over what could come next. The 14th Amendment allows the states to decide these things, so Congress, and the President, have overstepped their bounds. It’s in character for them, however, so I’m not surprised....there aren’t that many conservatives left on Capitol Hill. Up there, one side is rushing to support and legislate their Christian morality, and the other is working hard to simply oppose them. At least the Republicans are being who they are....the Democrats that are screaming about ‘restricting the federal government’ are at the height of hypocrisy. They had no problem with Roe V. Wade taking power away from the states where unwanted life was concerned...what’s the problem now? They just don’t support the saving of unwanted life. The logic of that chills me.

I’m not sure whether we are supposed to be getting e-mailed updates for these every day (like it started out in the beginning), but until I hear differently, I’m gonna keep posting these, every Tuesday, just to provide a little linky-love to my favorite blogs out there…

Like JimK pointing out weird Michael Jackson is. Go read the story, and you’ll know why I say, “Eeeeuuuuwwwww...”

Like John Hawkins talking about the Democratic Idea Gap. Quick: can anyone come up with the Democratic plan for Social Security? The Senate voted 100-0 in a non-binding resolution to agree that Social Security is a critical issue, but all I’ve heard from Democrats is that “there is no problem”.

Like Leigh talking about how John Kerry still hasn’t signed a SF-180, 51 days after having promised to do so. Guess he’s too busy voting his conscience in the Senate… wait, that wasn’t him, that was the other Senator Kerrey. The one who shows up for work.

Like Misha telling how the ACLU sides against America once again. Color me {yawn} shocked.

And like Captain Ed talking about how Muslim honor killings are on the rise in Europe. I vote we let them suffer a little first before saving their bacon in the war that will inevitably erupt…

So go on out there and look around, and enjoy yourself.

If you have any jasmine live blogs you think are worthy (and they have an RSS feed going), let me know.

Terry Schiavo is the subject of much contention, and my only position on this is to encourage the Florida and Federal courts to do exactly the same thing they didn’t do during November/December, 2000 - to follow the rules that are already in place.

The Supreme Court has long since decided that it is the right of the individual to choose whether or not to accept or continue life-sustaining treatment or machinery. That is the absolute last choice we are given.

The State of Florida has dealt with this situation on numerous occasions, long before Terry Schiavo. (It is the State with the highest average age of its residents, and a retirement chaturbate haven.) They have rules in place, as it is the right and requirement of the Several States to handle anything that isn’t specifically mentioned in the Constitution.

Congress dropped the ball, because they passed a law based on emotions, rather than the rights of the individual. No matter how irritating you might find Michael, it is still his right and decision.

I’m not making this a “right to life/die” issue. This is a States’ rights issue, plain and simple, and Congress wrote a law specific to an individual legal case. That’s unConstitutional. I honestly think that this law will be overturned as a Bill of Attainder.

Rightly so, too. The rules lead us to an abhorrent conclusion, but it is still quite clear.

Unless and until Michael Schiavo elects to waive his legal rights as spouse and guardian of Terry (through any of a number of means), he has the full authority of law to exercise those rights as Terry’s attorney (both de facto and de jure), fully empowered to make medical decisions regarding the quality and amount of health care she receives.

This is an issue to be settled at the State level, and Congress broke the rules to take it away from those courts.

I can only hope that two things happen: that a Court overturns last night’s legislation, and that Michael Schiavo walks away, leaving Terry in her parents’ care.

PS: If you choose to comment, let’s keep it on the legal and Constitutional ramifications, and not how much of a prick Michael is.

The United States opposed dictatorships in WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, The Cold War, Desert Shield/Desert Storm, and now, in OIF (Operation Iraqi Freedom).

We opposed communism and socialism for more than half of the last century, and we continue to do so.

These things are fact...are they disputable? No.

We are also fighting, both overtly and covertly, against Islamofascist Terrorism. This is related to OIF, as has been shown time after time. No WoT, no OIF, right? If Saddam Hussein was no threat, why worry? Why fight?

However, now, we fight. We overthrew Hussein, brought Khadaffi to heel, and have effectively cornered North Korea. Part of this fight is the spread of liberal (classic ‘liberal’, not John Kerry-liberal) democracy in the totalitarian world, with emphasis on the Middle East. Part is the spread of open markets and capitalism.

This ideal has been proven in both Afghanistan and Iraq, with echoes in Urkraine, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Lebanon.

The United States is opposed by Franco-German interests, by east-Asian communist regimes, by Islamic terrorist organizations, by socialist groups (International Answer), the leftists in America and Europe, and by post-nationalists.

Where does logic come into play here? Well…

Because these same organizations have not protested terrorist attacks in Israel or America, nor did they protest Saddam Hussein, or Pol Pot, or Idi Amin, or Kim Sung Il, it is logical to assume that they support them. Because these nations have communism as a governmental structure, it is logical to assume that they are anti-capitalist, and pro-socialist.

Logic also dictates that communists, socialists (or, more aptly, anti-capitalists) would be anti-American, since America’s stated goal is to spread democracy and capitalism.

Since the communists, socialists, post-nationalists, and ‘peace’ protestors have the same stated goals and outlooks, it is logical to assume that they are pro-Islamofascism. They all oppose the same things (America, capitalism, free markets, and democracy), so it is logical to assume they support the same things.

Therefore, it is logical to assume that the peace protestors support terrorism.