Terry Shaivo; Executive and Congressional Sloth at Protecting here Right to Life

Gary C Gibson. - 11:01am Mar 24, 2005 EDT (#446 of 448)

The Executive officers of Governments are one or a generally tripartite system developed, in the United States, to assure that as representatives of the people laws are developed and enforced to enact the just will of the people. The Judiciary is one branch of government; it interprets the laws, determining if they are constitutional. The Constitution of the United States and the respective state constitutions are the highest objective record of the will of the people regarding form and content of government.

The question arises about the right of Terry Schaivo to live, and the possible right of others to determine that she should die. While courts in the past may have permissively granted the right of others to kill pvs patients in the absence of a manifest consent by the victim, was there ever a law passed by a congress that gave the right to kill others in any circumstances beyond law enforcement, self-defense and death sentences as punishment for crimes?

One of the difficulties that Chief Executives may encounter in enforcing laws given to their branch by congress may be in being intimidated by vague and amorphous legal rulings by federal and state courts that are not based on actual laws passed by congress but instead upon the absence of actual laws regarding issues such as the question of expanding the legal right to take, harvest, kill or otherwise enact a homicide upon a human being, albeit in the Schaivo case one in a weaker physical condition.

If no laws exist on an issue it is not inevitable that the executive or congress must rely upon default interpretations by congress of what isn’t forbidden by the 18th century constitution regarding morality, technical field deployments a number of the fruits of progress that have created situations that didn’t exist in 1780.

Congress can pass laws, and the executive sign and enforce them, on issues such as a free waveform media with rave and unlimited invasive social effects hiding behind the ‘freedom of press’ article, or life extended people being subject to death through the decision of others. Why are the existing laws against homicide, torture, assault and battery and so forth negated by judicial choices to permit the killing of defenseless individuals such as Terry Schaivo?

William F. Buckley wrote well a few days ago about the democidal waves in the Congo. Can the right to life as a principle become respected everywhere? Can the right to life as a social ethos develop in a nation that slaughters the environment and cares not about the demise of so many species? Can the atheist cult in the Democratic Party take seriously the right to life claims of Republicans when the Republican value system cares only about the velocity of money and income? When the only value for a wilderness is to be harvested, the animals slaughtered, the fields ploughed and farm animals grown for slaughter and profit?

The right to life must become a pervasive social ethic that protects Terry Schaivo, ANWR, the air, wildlife and the prolific species that were abundant before the post-Victorian human population explosion.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=128&e=2&u=/ucwb/20050319/cm_ucwb/humanbutchery

Society must move forward in technical progress but also in environmental ethics and respect for the personal religious beliefs of others. Trans-national coporations have the cutting edge of profit and Spencerian competition as their modus vivendi casting bread upon the waters when needed to pacify the populus in order to continue downsizing their individual rights and life opportunities.

Progress must be found in conserving life and the environment, in protecting human freedom and in keeping society free from the shackles of oligarchy, neo-corporatism and authoritarianism. So many of the atheists have thrown straw man arguments regarding everything from Darwinianism to a quest for the freedom to be victimized in a rash abrogation of the right to live and to terminate Terry Schaivo.

Terry is the world’s champion at living in a persistent vegetative state perhaps. Very few live more that a year or at most 5 in that condition…and just a few made it ten years so far as I know. Terry has made it 15 years. Two others made it beyond 30 years

William F. Buckley offers the opinion that the word ‘kill’ shouldn’t be used in the Terry Shaivo life termination decision…yet it seems the right term for what is presently happening to her as she is forced to starve to death. Not even one policeman would step forward to take her out of the lair of death evidently…and why should they when President Bush has washed his hands of law enforcement obligations and will ‘watch from inside the executive branch’ as a puppet without the VP’s words to move his lips and without a top-flight attorney general or other legal adviser available. What can one expect besides ineffective politically selected gestures? The nation doesn’t need a lawyer for President, just an Executive that selects the best to be Attorney General.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=128&e=1&u=/ucwb/20050323/cm_ucwb/thegreatquandary
Years ago I set foot first upon a piece of Alaska wilderness land on an island and became lost in the late winter snows over time, praying when most weary to find a way to the road, almost immediately I found a trail that led to the road and eventually the Zimovia highway. In that time Terry Shaivo has been in a pvs non-rem sleep, and I could have been dead too perhaps, yet instead enjoyed the Clinton years, the Bush years, WTC disaster and sundry other events that might have better deleted…lucky Terry.

Medical science might benefit from studying what has kept Ms. Schaivo alive when most others have perished, and of course legislation should be made to standardize and record with extensive nmr the particulars of each individual that is marked for death with the approval of the courts…A right I do not believe they rightly have to give. At best the basis for granting a license to kill is a specious as the Plessy vs. Ferguson decision, so far as I can consider it presently.

http://www.epsociety.org/journal.htm Christian Philosophical Issues

I believe that the avoidance of rational philosophical consideration of issues by Congress such as the broadening of a social license to kill given by the courts without instruction by the legislature to do so is a bad way to address significant social issues.

I wish I had the time to research the question presently of what the U.S. Congress did to legislatively permit separate but equal schooling for blacks and whites in the era before Plessy vs. Ferguson when the Supreme Court granted permission for states to segregate schools. I was unaware until recently that major league baseball did have black players before it became segregated perhaps to follow popular sentiment of the era.

One can rather ignorant offer the opinion that a right to privacy covers the right to kill a vegetative spouse, and that on a constitutional basis...as if the founders contemplated the situation of someone continued for years on life support technology and would immediately have said go ahead, make out day, pull the plug on the vegetables...its your private decision.

The right to privacy as used by Federal Courts and some legal theorists representing plaintiffs seems a lame way to duck the responsibility of making laws and interpreting them with enlightenment.

Privacy is very important for individuals, of paramount importance in fact in business and in self-determination for members of a free society to run their own affairs. Privacy has however never been a legal shield for crimes in this instance such as homicide and perhaps assault and other forms of abuse. It may be that individuals such as minor poets and internet chat writers should have a right to privacy such that their names, life interests and phenomena should not be susceptible to exploitation as content by broadcast media. When one's private life and content become a source for public amusement sport for the broadcast media and public in general normal life earnings and private interests opportunities are annihilated...yet the lazy government would never ever do anything to curb the pervasive broadcast hegemony of transnational media over the public sector.

The broadcast wavelengths should be reapportioned to internet uses as soon as possible, and to private short range fm broadcasters, in order to break up the possibility of racketeering and domestic terrorism upon individual Americans. Free speech if extrapolated to broadcast wavelengths should be interpreted in the form of democratizing the medium as much as is technically possible to allow free enterprise, competition and the elimination of broadcast racketeering.

It may be that the public is too concerned with earning wages falling behind the price index increase, and getting hired to lower paying new jobs when their higher paying old jobs are discontinued or outsourced. Downsizing one's earnings and life investments may be useful as political leadership is trans-sourced, the environment is sold for trans-national reprocessing to profit etc. One can always retreat to the 'right to privacy' and ignore the implications of allowing civil liberties to be eroded even as fundamental as the right to live.

In many ways, atheistic, hedonists with a Darwinian license have reached a Cape Finisterre of philosophical thinking...the world ends at the edge, everything is known and comfort with trust in bio-science, mass broadcasts and technology will take care of everything. It’s a world of viewers-everything is ‘out there’ and as dubiously alien and irrelevant as dramas that provide pathos for it when necessary Privately retire with soma and tune if following satiation, drive the SUV to watch the BP refinery burn...the smell of oil is sweet no matter if the usual is bitter for the time being. If its burning in the city with 1800 citizen-priests fueling NASCAR today it will be extinguished and replaced in time. In the era of mass consumerism Terry Shaivo's expiration date seems nearly up.