Monday, March 28, 2005

‘Murder by Death’



The hours have ticked away.

No judge will consider the new evidence. The courts have rejected all appeals. There has been no last-minute action by the governor. Those about to carry out the execution talk coldly of “due process.” Last rites have been given. The appointed hour draws nigh.

Sounds like one of those movies where the convict, sentenced to die, is waiting for his sentence to be carried out... and the lawyer, the nun and several office staff are working frantically to persuade someone — anyone — to allow their client to live.

‘Dead Man Walking’... that’s the one.

That movie was based upon a true story.

The convict that movie was about, Matthew Poncelet, played by Sean Penn, actually deserved to die for what he had done: rape and murder. At the end of that story the convict was put to death by lethal injection in a fairly short period of time, while the nun cried and his family lamented.

Those opposing execution staged rallies outside of the prison, lighting candles and holding placards proclaiming the inhumanity of the spectacle.

We see this sort of thing every time we put a convicted criminal to death in this country.

Can you imagine the outrage we would see if the sentencing judge had ordered Mr. Poncelet be “denied food and water” until his “death process” was completed? I imagine the networks and the special interest groups would be shouting at the top of their lungs.

The politicians against the death penalty would step up to piles of microphones talking about “cruel and unusual punishment.”

Although I support the death penalty for people who callously take the lives of others I believe that, in the case of a convicted murderer being starved and dehydrated to death, I’d have to side with the protesters on that one.

And, no, I do not believe Terri Schiavo should be put to death by lethal injection. She is NOT Matthew Poncelet. She has hurt no one. I suspect, however, that after the shock of this starvation death finally hits people there WILL be talk of doing this in the future “humanely.” That’s the slippery slop we’ve just begun.

Except for the people who are scared about the precedent the murder of Terri Schiavo represents; a shamefully small number of Christians, families with handicapped children and those who believe food and water is not life by “artificial means,” there is no outcry from the special interest groups.

The politicians, the Christian Church, the special interest groups, those against the death penalty, those against treating animals inhumanely, the nuns and those without handicapped relatives are either FOR the death of Terri Schiavo or have decided to remain on the sidelines.

She will die at any time and then be immediately cremated and her ashes interred several states away from her family in Pennsylvania. Terri’s family may or may not be allowed to attend Terri’s funeral.

Terri’s family can only watch and do nothing to help her... reduced to being strip searched when they are allowed to see her in her last moments and reduced to begging the pontificating, fence post-sitting and phony “Christian” governor to live up to his own convictions about life.

Many anti-death penalty advocates have been heard to say, “I am ashamed to live in a country that puts people to death!”

Now that our country is legally torturing people to death by denying them food and water — non-criminals, non-murderers — I have to say that I know exactly how they feel.

13 Comments:

At 9:50 AM, Blogger Rohan Singh said...

Kerry, I think you're seriously losing it.

About 4,000 poeple are removed from life support every day, most of whom had an express written wish to not stay on life support. And yes, food and water through a tube connected to your stomach is artificial means. There is nothing natural about that.

30 legal opinions have ruled that Terri Schiavo's wish was indeed not to stay on life support by artificial means. And Kerry, I think you'll agree with me that when someone says life support by artificial mean, that usually includes having a feeding tube attached to their stomach for 15 years because they can't eat.

 
At 6:24 PM, Blogger Kerry R. Fox said...

“Kerry, I think you're seriously losing it.”

...:-) Well, that’s certainly possible.

Seriously, your comments perpetuate many misconceptions about this particular case.

“About 4,000 poeple are removed from life support every day, most of whom had an express written wish to not stay on life support. And yes, food and water through a tube connected to your stomach is artificial means. There is nothing natural about that.”

The vast majority of those removed from life support are those removed from a respirator and are brain dead or have a fatal illness. Terri is not brain dead nor does she have a fatal illness.

“30 legal opinions have ruled that Terri Schiavo's wish was indeed not to stay on life support by artificial means.”

That would be impressive save the fact that these rulings were on “procedure” only from the original case. No new evidence was ever allowed to be admitted, until this past week and that was summarily dismissed due to judicial stonewalling.

“And Kerry, I think you'll agree with me that when someone says life support by artificial mean, that usually includes having a feeding tube attached to their stomach for 15 years because they can't eat.”

This is another non-fact. Terri CAN eat. The feeding tube has been in place because her husband has refused to allow the therapy necessary for her to learn to eat again. In fact, she was allowed to eat soft foods for several years after her episode, until her husband won his lawsuit, suddenly remembered her off-hand comment she made at a funeral years before and had all therapy stopped. This is when he hired an attorney and began his campaign to starve her to death.

One poster here said that “she can’t swallow.” That is untrue as well. She swallows her own saliva. So... she COULD eat if she were allowed to do so.

In any event, it’s never been a precedent of law or a definition of law that “artificial means” includes food and water via a feeding tube... until now.

 
At 9:35 AM, Blogger Rohan Singh said...

Kerry,

If it truly is the case that Terri can eat soft foods but her husband stopped the therapy, then I guess I was incorrect in my original post. Do you have any links to any articles that say this, though? I've been keeping fairly up-to-date on the case, and haven't seen this information yet.

Both for me and plenty of people I've spoken to, we believe Michael Schiavo doesn't really have evil intentions because his actions would be completely illogical in that context. For example, he's received several offers of various million-dollar amounts to give up custody of Terri Schiavo to her parents, but he refuses to accept these offers. Also, he could have divorced Terri after winning a malpractice case against the hospital that Terri was in when she was first admitted. If he'd done that, he would've walked away with a few hundred thousand dollars from the malpractice settlement.

But, he hasn't walked away. If he's in it for the money, it just doesn't make sense for him to still be at it. I think that's why a lot of us give our support to Michael Schiavo, because it just doesn't make any sense for him to not have good intentions.

PS: I still think you're losing it ;)

 
At 9:35 AM, Blogger Rohan Singh said...

Kerry,

If it truly is the case that Terri can eat soft foods but her husband stopped the therapy, then I guess I was incorrect in my original post. Do you have any links to any articles that say this, though? I've been keeping fairly up-to-date on the case, and haven't seen this information yet.

Both for me and plenty of people I've spoken to, we believe Michael Schiavo doesn't really have evil intentions because his actions would be completely illogical in that context. For example, he's received several offers of various million-dollar amounts to give up custody of Terri Schiavo to her parents, but he refuses to accept these offers. Also, he could have divorced Terri after winning a malpractice case against the hospital that Terri was in when she was first admitted. If he'd done that, he would've walked away with a few hundred thousand dollars from the malpractice settlement.

But, he hasn't walked away. If he's in it for the money, it just doesn't make sense for him to still be at it. I think that's why a lot of us give our support to Michael Schiavo, because it just doesn't make any sense for him to not have good intentions.

PS: I still think you're losing it ;)

 
At 9:36 AM, Blogger Rohan Singh said...

Kerry,

If it truly is the case that Terri can eat soft foods but her husband stopped the therapy, then I guess I was incorrect in my original post. Do you have any links to any articles that say this, though? I've been keeping fairly up-to-date on the case, and haven't seen this information yet.

Both for me and plenty of people I've spoken to, we believe Michael Schiavo doesn't really have evil intentions because his actions would be completely illogical in that context. For example, he's received several offers of various million-dollar amounts to give up custody of Terri Schiavo to her parents, but he refuses to accept these offers. Also, he could have divorced Terri after winning a malpractice case against the hospital that Terri was in when she was first admitted. If he'd done that, he would've walked away with a few hundred thousand dollars from the malpractice settlement.

But, he hasn't walked away. If he's in it for the money, it just doesn't make sense for him to still be at it. I think that's why a lot of us give our support to Michael Schiavo, because it just doesn't make any sense for him to not have good intentions.

PS: I still think you're losing it ;)

 
At 9:41 AM, Blogger Rohan Singh said...

Kerry,

If it truly is the case that Terri can eat soft foods but her husband stopped the therapy, then I guess I was incorrect in my original post. Do you have any links to any articles that say this, though? I've been keeping fairly up-to-date on the case, and haven't seen this information yet.

Both for me and plenty of people I've spoken to, we believe Michael Schiavo doesn't really have evil intentions because his actions would be completely illogical in that context. For example, he's received several offers of various million-dollar amounts to give up custody of Terri Schiavo to her parents, but he refuses to accept these offers. Also, he could have divorced Terri after winning a malpractice case against the hospital that Terri was in when she was first admitted. If he'd done that, he would've walked away with a few hundred thousand dollars from the malpractice settlement.

But, he hasn't walked away. If he's in it for the money, it just doesn't make sense for him to still be at it. I think that's why a lot of us give our support to Michael Schiavo, because it just doesn't make any sense for him to not have good intentions.

PS: I still think you're losing it ;)

 
At 9:42 AM, Blogger Rohan Singh said...

Kerry,

If it truly is the case that Terri can eat soft foods but her husband stopped the therapy, then I guess I was incorrect in my original post. Do you have any links to any articles that say this, though? I've been keeping fairly up-to-date on the case, and haven't seen this information yet.

Both for me and plenty of people I've spoken to, we believe Michael Schiavo doesn't really have evil intentions because his actions would be completely illogical in that context. For example, he's received several offers of various million-dollar amounts to give up custody of Terri Schiavo to her parents, but he refuses to accept these offers. Also, he could have divorced Terri after winning a malpractice case against the hospital that Terri was in when she was first admitted. If he'd done that, he would've walked away with a few hundred thousand dollars from the malpractice settlement.

But, he hasn't walked away. If he's in it for the money, it just doesn't make sense for him to still be at it. I think that's why a lot of us give our support to Michael Schiavo, because it just doesn't make any sense for him to not have good intentions.

PS: I still think you're losing it ;)

 
At 9:44 AM, Blogger Rohan Singh said...

Kerry,

If it truly is the case that Terri can eat soft foods but her husband stopped the therapy, then I guess I was incorrect in my original post. Do you have any links to any articles that say this, though? I've been keeping fairly up-to-date on the case, and haven't seen this information yet.

Both for me and plenty of people I've spoken to, we believe Michael Schiavo doesn't really have evil intentions because his actions would be completely illogical in that context. For example, he's received several offers of various million-dollar amounts to give up custody of Terri Schiavo to her parents, but he refuses to accept these offers. Also, he could have divorced Terri after winning a malpractice case against the hospital that Terri was in when she was first admitted. If he'd done that, he would've walked away with a few hundred thousand dollars from the malpractice settlement.

But, he hasn't walked away. If he's in it for the money, it just doesn't make sense for him to still be at it. I think that's why a lot of us give our support to Michael Schiavo, because it just doesn't make any sense for him to not have good intentions.

PS: I still think you're losing it ;)

 
At 5:13 PM, Blogger Cary Patrick Martin said...

May she rest in peace.

 
At 5:13 PM, Blogger Cary Patrick Martin said...

May she rest in peace.

 
At 6:21 PM, Blogger Cary Patrick Martin said...

May she rest in peace.

 
At 2:22 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think you're right on track and not many people are willing to admit that they share your views. josh halloway is an AWESOME place to discuss LOST.

 
At 9:33 AM, Blogger job opportunitya said...

Extraordinary blog. Your site was hip and fresh
and we'll visit it again! I love surfing the internet
for blogs.
Please proceed to my extended stay colorado blog when you find the time.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home