Entry: Death and Justice Friday, April 01, 2005



The growing cult of death won a victory in the battle to devalue life with the judicial murder of Terri Schiavo. Sentenced to die on hearsay alone, for no crime greater than being brain-damaged and voiceless, Terri slowly starved to death while nutrition and water were withheld from her by court order. Every attempt to reverse the court's decision or alter Terri's state-sanctioned fate was blocked by the judicial system, a system that has lost any right to use the word "justice."

For decades, the pro-death secularist Liberals have been whittling away at the respect for life we once held. They have openly supported anti-life policies, from abortions without parental notification to late-term abortions of viable babies to the "right to die" of people who aren't actually dying. Now, with the death of Terri Schiavo, they have turned the judiciary into a vehicle for killing off the unwanted as well as the unborn. We have been taught to accept death as an easy solution, not an inevitability to be put off as long as possible. Adversity is not something to be faced with courage. Death is merely a "choice," like whether to order chicken or veal.

Once upon a time, before our judicial system decided that unborn children were "nonpersons" with no more right to live than a tapeworm, a judgment like that handed down by Judge Greer would have been impossible. If American culture still had the reverence for life it had just 40 years ago, mercy and reason would have tempered Greer's decision, instead of this soulless strictness about adhering to the letter of the law above all. It wouldn't and shouldn't have been merely a question of who had the right to kill Terri, but whether it was right to do so at all. The slow erosion of our values has coarsened us the to the point where many of us shrug off the deliberate killing of a helpless person by our courts as "probably for the best." This apathetic attitude persists despite the fact that the person in question was in no danger of dying, and had a family willing to care for her for the rest of her life.

In this struggle to weaken our sense of right and wrong, activist judges have taken upon themselves power they were never intended to have. Thomas Jefferson warned us that renegade judges could be a danger to liberty, though even he never imagined they would be a danger to life itself. "To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions [is] a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one that would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy," he wrote in 1820. Time and again we have seen laws written by the elected representatives of the people simply thrown out because they don't suit a particular judge's agenda. Many times judges have dictated to the legislature what laws they should write, as in the case of the Massachusetts Supreme Court ordering the legislature to write a law allowing gay marriage within six months.

Judges tend to support each other to preserve their collective power, as was shown by all the courts involved in the Schiavo case simply ruling that proper procedures were followed without actually looking at the facts and testimony, or calling for up-to-date tests. Even when the Congress of the United States, in a vain attempt to prevent Terri Schiavo's constitutional rights to due process from being violated by the Florida judiciary, passed a law requiring a de novo review of the case, Judge Whittemore of the US District court simply reviewed the procedures again, as had all the judges before him.

Jefferson cautioned that judges would be "constantly working underground to undermine the foundations of our confederated fabric." The respect our legal system once held for life, the mercy and protection our laws afforded the innocent and helpless were integral to that fabric, now picked apart by judicial activism. We may be a nation of laws, but we are no longer a nation of justice.

   9 comments

AJ
April 1, 2005   09:31 AM PST
 
I am amazed at how "not stupid" you are. :)

I am also amazed that you are able to see these things and are not a Christian. I have never met any "seeing" person that was not a Christian and have met few "Christians" that are not blind to the truth as well for that matter.

Keep up the good work!
TCM
April 1, 2005   03:49 PM PST
 
The real tragedy of the Terry Shiavo fiasco is that it was never about Terri at all. A few of those concerned might have actually cared about Terri, but the vast majority saw her only as a tool. Terri was used to get ratings, sell newspapers, draw traffic to web sites, and advance the agendas of hundreds of people who didn’t even know who Terri was a month ago, let alone give a damn about her. Armies of reporters cheerfully brought cameras to the deathbed of a retarded woman in the name of entertainment disguised as journalism. Her situation became a springboard for every extremist with an axe to grind to shove his opinion down the public’s throat in the name of “decency.” This was never a question of morality, it was a contest of sound bites designed to impose the will of a vocal minority of religious zealots upon the rest of the nation. The American way is not pro-life or pro-death; it is the right to choose without interference from any federal or religious institution, and without judgment from some self-righteous media spin doctor. In the absence of a living will, the decision whether or not to prolong life falls to our loved ones. What should have been a solemn decision by a small circle of family was turned into a media circus and a political soapbox for hypocrites on both sides of the issue. And now that Terri is dead, the popular media will forget her within a week as it moves on to the next hot topic of the moment, and we will all find ourselves no wiser than before. And that is tragic, indeed.
JM
April 1, 2005   07:21 PM PST
 
I feel sorry for the terminally cynical. Just because you care about nothing doesn't mean others don't, so kindly stop projecting your own self-loathing onto others. Thanks.
skye
April 2, 2005   03:44 PM PST
 

"We are no longer a nation of justice"

This can be rectified by a consistant conservative vote.


Another fine essay, Cav!
carla
April 2, 2005   07:47 PM PST
 
<i>The growing cult of death won a victory in the battle to devalue life with the judicial murder of Terri Schiavo. Sentenced to die on hearsay alone, for no crime greater than being brain-damaged and voiceless, Terri slowly starved to death while nutrition and water were withheld from her by court order. Every attempt to reverse the court's decision or alter Terri's state-sanctioned fate was blocked by the judicial system, a system that has lost any right to use the word "justice."</i>

It is the height of arrogance for those who disagree with an individual's wish to not be kept alive on tubes to decide that they know what's best...and attempt to override that decision.

The federal legislative and executive intervention in this matter was an egregious example of arrogance and power mongering run amok.

It also proved to the mainstream nation that the Republican Party has drifted to the fringe. They are soaked in their own hubris.



JM
April 2, 2005   09:29 PM PST
 
>It is the height of arrogance for
>those who disagree with an
>individual's wish to not be kept
>alive on tubes

It is, in fact, the height of arrogance to believe that you had a clue as to what she wanted. Hearsay evidence from a source with questionable motives shouldn;t be enough to sentence someone to death.

>The federal legislative and
>executive intervention in this
>matter was an egregious example
>of arrogance and power
>mongering run amok.

The state and federal judiciary ignoring the wishes of Congress in this matter was an egregious example of arrogance and power mongering run amok.

>They are soaked in their own
>hubris.

Liberals lecturing about hubris? Now that's irony.
Susan
April 5, 2005   12:15 AM PDT
 
JM:
You have neglected to include the relevant context from which you lifted the Jefferson quotes. At the risk of impugning the reputation of a beloved founding father, Jefferson was a partisan hack at heart. As an early Republicaln, Jefferson despised the Federalists (including Washington, Adams and Marshall) and, since the judiciary was controlled by the Federalists through Adam's midnight appointments, Jefferson also despised the Supreme Court and the federal judiciary. Therefore, Jefferson placed the federal judiciary at the center of his attacks on the Federalists through his enforcement of the Alien and Sedition Act and served as President in a term featuring the only succesfull impeachment of a Supreme Court Justice in American history. To say that Jefferson held the Supreme Court in contempt is an understatement. As such, your stirring quotations from Jefferson regarding the threat imposed by the judiciary are marginalized through his (potentially) irrational hatred of the federal judiciary.

For more background, I suggest reading: What Kind of Nation, Thomas Jefferson, John Marshall, and the Epic Struggle to Create a United States by James F. Simon. It is an excellent read for historical perspective on the evolution of the federal government during its formative years and the importance of an independent and strong judiciary.
JM
April 5, 2005   02:05 AM PDT
 
So... feeling strongly about something makes any of your comments on the subject irrelevant? Interesting theory, but I don't buy it. As for context, many of his comments were made in light of Marbury v. Madison, the case in which the Supreme Court decided that it had supreme power over the other two branches of government. Imagine his unhappiness at discovering that there was a giant loophole through which one branch of the government could -- and did -- sieze ultimate power. Of course he despised them for setting up a judicial oligarchy -- and so do I.
Mad heron
April 11, 2005   09:51 AM PDT
 
I imagine that if this involved a endangered species they would go all out to save that species and just think if someone had starved a dog or horse they would have that person in jail or someone chopped down a tree with a spotted owl nest in it they would be facing a $3:000 fine and a year in jail but this was a person and so they will do nothing although HOLLYWOOD might make a movie about it

Leave a Comment:

Name


Homepage (optional)


Comments