Double Standard

By GotDesign
I have long said that Liberals are the champions of double standards. They are proving it once again. I was just listening to a portion of the Laura Ingraham radio program. Laura has been discussing the latest on the Terri Schiavo debacle. She played highlights from Real Time with Bill Mahr. Among Mr. Mahr's guests were Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski. On one hand, Mahr asked Murkowski about ending the Iditarod Sled Dog race. Mahr, a member of PETA's board, said it was cruel to dogs. On the other hand, Mahr said we should allow Terri Schiavo to die. In doing so, Mahr also took a stab at Christians by saying "Why is it that the people who love God the most are least willing to go be with Him?" So racing dogs through the Alaskan tundra is cruel, but starving a woman to death for her husband's convenience is not?

I have learned a few more facts about the Schiavo case since I last blogged on it. It seem that Terri's husband, Michael, was given (through legal action?) money for Terri's care and he has not spent it. I have also heard that there are medications that can help remediate Terri's condition and help make her more responsive, have not been used because Michael Schiavo has blocked their use.

So many people evidently think that Terri Schiavo is being kept alive by ventilators or respirators or some such equipment. That by "pulling the plug," Terri will simply pass away. But Terri Schiavo is only receiving food and water. Terri has no life-threatening condition. She just needs food. You and I just need food (I say this while preparing my own lunch) to live. Michael Schiavo, et al, wants to stop feeding her -- take away her food and water. She would then starve to death.

People often ask, how can Terri have any quality of life in such a state? Quality of life is exactly what is being denied to Terri. Her husband has blocked any attempts to treat her condition. There are effective treatments available. But I will go further. Does anyone with severe mental retardation have "quality of life?" Why not stop feeding them? Why not let them die? Or even help them along (Groningen Protocol)?

Another frequent rejoinder is that the U.S. Congress, by requiring federal court review of Terri's case, is usurping state powers. But aren't the courts of the State of Florida usurping Terri's right to live? The only person who is pushing for the removal of Terri's feeding tube is a husband who has been living with another woman --with whom he has had 2 children while still "married" to Terri -- had who has refused to allow Terri any treatment.

I am still outraged by all of this. Why aren't you?


0 comments so far.

Something to say?