Wednesday, March 23, 2005
Know-it-All Congress (Ad Hoc)
Poor Terri Schiavo. Poor family. Poor all of us, for getting dragged into it.
It really should come as no surprise. Remember the Know-Nothing Congress? Call this one the Know-it-All Congress (Ad Hoc ) (see second definition). And an Ad Hoc presidency. If it feels good, do it, to dust off the old '70s phrase.
Read this, and tell me whether it sounds anything like this country now. John Quincy Adams, as Secretary of State, said it in a speech on July 4, 1821. Would that the lions of our heritage were alive today!
The issues are related in this way: Still staggering from the blows of 9/11, we continue to blindly swing at unseen enemies from without and over-react to every thing that goes bump in the night in our own house -- and oddly, with an underlying sense of hubris.
“America does not go abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own. She will recommend the general cause by the countenance of her voice, and the benignant sympathy of her own example. She well knows that by once enlisting under banners other than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself beyond the power of extrication, in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy, ambition, which assumed the colors and usurped the standards of freedom. The fundamental maxims of her policy would insensibly change from liberty to force. … She might become the dictatress of the world. She would no longer be the ruler of her own spirit.”*
Truly, we are no longer the ruler of our own spirit.
--ER
*Quoted in Anonymous, Imperial Hubris: Why the West is Losing the War on Terror, (Dulles, Va.: Brassey's Inc., 2004), 200.
It really should come as no surprise. Remember the Know-Nothing Congress? Call this one the Know-it-All Congress (Ad Hoc ) (see second definition). And an Ad Hoc presidency. If it feels good, do it, to dust off the old '70s phrase.
Read this, and tell me whether it sounds anything like this country now. John Quincy Adams, as Secretary of State, said it in a speech on July 4, 1821. Would that the lions of our heritage were alive today!
The issues are related in this way: Still staggering from the blows of 9/11, we continue to blindly swing at unseen enemies from without and over-react to every thing that goes bump in the night in our own house -- and oddly, with an underlying sense of hubris.
“America does not go abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own. She will recommend the general cause by the countenance of her voice, and the benignant sympathy of her own example. She well knows that by once enlisting under banners other than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself beyond the power of extrication, in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy, ambition, which assumed the colors and usurped the standards of freedom. The fundamental maxims of her policy would insensibly change from liberty to force. … She might become the dictatress of the world. She would no longer be the ruler of her own spirit.”*
Truly, we are no longer the ruler of our own spirit.
--ER
*Quoted in Anonymous, Imperial Hubris: Why the West is Losing the War on Terror, (Dulles, Va.: Brassey's Inc., 2004), 200.
Comments:
<< Home
Your going to keep milking this aren't you? Terri is going to die soon without food and water. I wish to god that you and all the other left-wing political whores had to watch it. I'd hold your eyes open and make you watch as she struggles for breath. I'd make you watch as she dies and her body pisses and shits. I'd make you smell death. Its easy to throw around states rights and other bullshit when it doesn't affect you. You wouldn't be so high and mighty if it was your son or wife or daughter.
# posted by 
: 8:48 AM
: 8:48 AM
Anonymous: Go away. Or, watch your mouth (language, sir, or ma'am, not your ideas).
And, I might be a whore, but not for politics, and for damn sure not the left wing. Or the right wing.
Just what part of Redneck do you not understand?
Oh, and particularly interesting is your confusion of state's rights and the left wing! Ha! Just shows how screwed up this whole thing has become.
And, I might be a whore, but not for politics, and for damn sure not the left wing. Or the right wing.
Just what part of Redneck do you not understand?
Oh, and particularly interesting is your confusion of state's rights and the left wing! Ha! Just shows how screwed up this whole thing has become.
Ms. Anonymous:
Having watched my mother die because SHE chose to take out her feeding tube -- yes, she was suffering from a terminal illness, so this only sped process -- I can say watching a loved one die is not easy. But knowing that your loved one would not want to live in a particular manner would make it even more agonizing. I respect and understand what this family is going through, and I'm sure the debates and discussions have not only been toward each other but even in inner dialogues.
To pray that your loved one's pain be gone through her death means praying for her to leave -- praying for that laughter to cease, praying for that lifelong connection to end, praying for that pride to vanish. It's not easy.
Love never ends. It stays with you forever as long as you have a loving heart and open your mind and your heart to others.
And if I were ever stricken with similar circumstances -- to where I could no longer be of any service to may family, my friends and this world -- I, too, would rather die. I do not want to be a burden on anyone, and I am confident God will accept me in heaven.
It's for me to work out with God and my family, not the politician who has his own interests in hand.
Having watched my mother die because SHE chose to take out her feeding tube -- yes, she was suffering from a terminal illness, so this only sped process -- I can say watching a loved one die is not easy. But knowing that your loved one would not want to live in a particular manner would make it even more agonizing. I respect and understand what this family is going through, and I'm sure the debates and discussions have not only been toward each other but even in inner dialogues.
To pray that your loved one's pain be gone through her death means praying for her to leave -- praying for that laughter to cease, praying for that lifelong connection to end, praying for that pride to vanish. It's not easy.
Love never ends. It stays with you forever as long as you have a loving heart and open your mind and your heart to others.
And if I were ever stricken with similar circumstances -- to where I could no longer be of any service to may family, my friends and this world -- I, too, would rather die. I do not want to be a burden on anyone, and I am confident God will accept me in heaven.
It's for me to work out with God and my family, not the politician who has his own interests in hand.
Teditor, what you're saying is that you want to make your own decisions about your death if you're ever confronted by that choice. I totally support that. And there is a procedure that has to be followed if you want that choice. It's called a living will. Everyone should have one so that their families don't have to go through what Terri's family is going through. My point is Terri didn't have one. None of those legal matters were settled. We have only dubious hearsay about her wishes. This case should have never reached this point. The judges are ignoring ruling after ruling about right-to-die. They're supposed to see what the body of law says. If you notice, you will see that the major right-to-die-with-dignity organizations are keeping a low profile on this. Their comments are limited to vague mouthing about an individual's right to choose, but they carefully do not comment on Terri. They realize the stakes of this.
But let's put Terri aside for a moment and look at the larger picture. Does anyone think that killing her will be a victory? By this, do you think the political opponents of right-to-die-with-dignity won't use her death as a tool? Terri's death is going to cost us. There will be new laws proposed that will take money and time to defeat. Aside from the human cost, the political cost will be high also.
In the best of all worlds Terri would wake up and be fine. The next of best worlds she would be given into the care of her parents. And one world over from that she would die quickly from something unrelated to being starved to death. Otherwise we are a nation of people who allowed a silented person to be starved to death. Won't we be proud of that.
But let's put Terri aside for a moment and look at the larger picture. Does anyone think that killing her will be a victory? By this, do you think the political opponents of right-to-die-with-dignity won't use her death as a tool? Terri's death is going to cost us. There will be new laws proposed that will take money and time to defeat. Aside from the human cost, the political cost will be high also.
In the best of all worlds Terri would wake up and be fine. The next of best worlds she would be given into the care of her parents. And one world over from that she would die quickly from something unrelated to being starved to death. Otherwise we are a nation of people who allowed a silented person to be starved to death. Won't we be proud of that.
# posted by : 1:54 PM
: 1:54 PM
Jake, you make valid points. But the way I see it, Terri's death happened long ago. Her husband honestly believes Terri would not want to continue "living" in this manner, and I see that as a more valid point.
Terri didn't have a living will. Nor do I at this point. How many people actually think of doing that, though? Yes, I should get one for cases just like this. We all should.
It's also a question of what's humane. We wouldn't let a dog live the way she's being kept alive.
If I were in her husband's shoes, knew her and loved her as much as he has, I'd know her wishes whether she had a living will or not.
Terri didn't have a living will. Nor do I at this point. How many people actually think of doing that, though? Yes, I should get one for cases just like this. We all should.
It's also a question of what's humane. We wouldn't let a dog live the way she's being kept alive.
If I were in her husband's shoes, knew her and loved her as much as he has, I'd know her wishes whether she had a living will or not.
Teditor, truth is we don't know how much he loves her or not loves her. Just because he's her husband doesn't mean he loves her. (Remember Scott Peterson?) We do know he lives with another woman and has had children with her. We know he has never denied cheating on Terri.
But this is beside the point. These guesses into his state of mind and his love for his wife are not what a court should consider. It should consider there is no living will since that is the only fact we can know for certain. We can hope Michael's telling the truth, but we cannot know since we can't read his mind.
In absence of a living will, various courts have ruled to keep a person alive. Florida courts should not ignore the body of law. Otherwise you end up with Congress attempting to check their excess and creating a host of new problems.
As I write this I feel Terri will die soon. It fills me with great sadness and fear for the future.
But this is beside the point. These guesses into his state of mind and his love for his wife are not what a court should consider. It should consider there is no living will since that is the only fact we can know for certain. We can hope Michael's telling the truth, but we cannot know since we can't read his mind.
In absence of a living will, various courts have ruled to keep a person alive. Florida courts should not ignore the body of law. Otherwise you end up with Congress attempting to check their excess and creating a host of new problems.
As I write this I feel Terri will die soon. It fills me with great sadness and fear for the future.
# posted by : 3:06 PM
: 3:06 PM
To quote Jake: "Florida courts should not ignore the body of law."
And that comes full circle back to E.R.'s position on state's rights. Florida courts are coming down on the side of the marital relationship, the spousal contract between Michael and Terri.
Consider the arguments made for same-sex marriage and the protection of civil unions. Those protections are sought so that partners have the same legal rights as married heterosexual couples to make decisions like this for one another.
Michael's behavior may not now be that which we would hope to see from a devoted spouse, being with another woman and having produced children in that relationship. I've tried so hard to understand how he can continue to say he loves Terri in such circumstances, and at the moment, all I can say is that maybe it's because he wants to continue to offer her that spousal protection to honor her wishes.
If Florida courts indeed are upholding the spouse's right to make this decision, we absolutely do not want federal interference in that relationship. As many aspersions as we may cast on Michael, we may be looking for a sinister element that may not be there after all.
As I have said on my own blog, there is no court and there is no doctor who can make this situation right, not here on earth.
And that comes full circle back to E.R.'s position on state's rights. Florida courts are coming down on the side of the marital relationship, the spousal contract between Michael and Terri.
Consider the arguments made for same-sex marriage and the protection of civil unions. Those protections are sought so that partners have the same legal rights as married heterosexual couples to make decisions like this for one another.
Michael's behavior may not now be that which we would hope to see from a devoted spouse, being with another woman and having produced children in that relationship. I've tried so hard to understand how he can continue to say he loves Terri in such circumstances, and at the moment, all I can say is that maybe it's because he wants to continue to offer her that spousal protection to honor her wishes.
If Florida courts indeed are upholding the spouse's right to make this decision, we absolutely do not want federal interference in that relationship. As many aspersions as we may cast on Michael, we may be looking for a sinister element that may not be there after all.
As I have said on my own blog, there is no court and there is no doctor who can make this situation right, not here on earth.
If all of you people who think it's okay for Terri's husband to make the decision of whether she lives or dies -- and make no mistake -- HE is making the decision -- she left us no hard evidence of what she would want -- then for the love of God, just put a bullet in her head. Or euthanize her, if that will be easier for you to stomach. But don't deny her food and water and let her slowly starve to death. How, in anyone's wildest imagination, is THAT humane?
Crystal, I absolutely do not agree with the withholding of water and nutrition, and I have said so on my blog. I don't agree with Michael's decision. However, he is the one with the legal contract -- a marriage. And again -- there is NO ONE who can make a right decision in this case, no matter what stance they take. That's why this is so agonizing.
My point is the Florida courts are attempting to ignore the body of law and set a new standard in this. This is becoming a dirty feud between the lawmakers and the courts. Terri's life hangs in the balance. I applaud all efforts to extend her life. If god truly exists and wants Terri then he can come and get her. He doesn't need us starving her to death.
# posted by : 4:19 PM
: 4:19 PM
Jake, re: "My point is the Florida courts are attempting to ignore the body of law and set a new standard in this."
I do not know that to be the case. I'm fairly certain that the Florida courts are relying on the body of law IN FLORIDA. If they are not, then I'm sure there are mechanisms for impeaching them.
Again, my own tiny position in this is now moot, apparently. Congress should not have tried to become involved. I do not deny that Congress has the power to do so (although I'm not too sure about that, actually). But whether it does or does not, I believe it sets a dangerous precedent. Not a legal one, but a precendent of expectation. It was cruel to Terri's parents for those POLS to jump into this.
By the way, the next person who calls me a lefty gets bounced.
And everyone who is praying for Terri and her family -- as well as her parents -- we should probably pray for Congress, and the judges, and everyone else caught up in this.
And add this: A woman I know in Texas called me this morning and asked me to pray for her brother, an older man, who is afraid he will go blind because of a torn retina. She said he has his usual prayer groups and had never ever asked her, his sister, for prayer. That's an indication of how unsettled he is.
Lord, soothe his fear and heal him, but your will be done.
Post a Comment
I do not know that to be the case. I'm fairly certain that the Florida courts are relying on the body of law IN FLORIDA. If they are not, then I'm sure there are mechanisms for impeaching them.
Again, my own tiny position in this is now moot, apparently. Congress should not have tried to become involved. I do not deny that Congress has the power to do so (although I'm not too sure about that, actually). But whether it does or does not, I believe it sets a dangerous precedent. Not a legal one, but a precendent of expectation. It was cruel to Terri's parents for those POLS to jump into this.
By the way, the next person who calls me a lefty gets bounced.
And everyone who is praying for Terri and her family -- as well as her parents -- we should probably pray for Congress, and the judges, and everyone else caught up in this.
And add this: A woman I know in Texas called me this morning and asked me to pray for her brother, an older man, who is afraid he will go blind because of a torn retina. She said he has his usual prayer groups and had never ever asked her, his sister, for prayer. That's an indication of how unsettled he is.
Lord, soothe his fear and heal him, but your will be done.
<< Home
