Terri's slow-motion
torture death
Posted: March 22, 2005
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Msgr. James C. Brunner
? 2005 WorldNetDaily.com
As this is written, the feeding tube of Terri Schiavo has been removed
by order of Judge George Greer and, unless a federal court intervenes,
she will die a painful death by starvation in a period ranging from
four to 20 days. In all the discussion of this case it seems to me
that its essential morality has been overlooked. The argument seems to
rage about who has the final authority in sentencing her to death.
Which legislature or court, state or federal? The husband or the
family? This misses the central point: Should any political entity or
any individual have the right to sentence a person in a "persistent
vegetative state" to death?
We need to be clear. Removing the feeding tube from Terri is not
"allowing nature to take its course" or "allowing her to die." If a
man locks his daughter in a closet for two weeks and gives her no food
or drink, he is causing her death. Nobody would speak of letting
nature take it course but about homicide. We have here a court-ordered
homicide. No governmental agency or private individual should have
authority to impose a sentence of this sort on an innocent human being.
ANH, or assisted nutrition and hydration, means only the giving of
food and water to persons who get hungry and thirsty. Pope John Paul
II teaches that even when provided by artificial means, it remains a
natural method of preserving life and not a medical act. No one thinks
that spooning food into an infant's mouth when he is incapable of
feeding himself is an unnatural or medical act.
Even convicted criminals and terrorists who have tried to kill us are
entitled to three meals a day. On what grounds do we deny food to
Terri? Judge George Greer must have graduated from the Dr. Kevorkian
school of law. If he wanted to impose a death sentence why did he not
just have the tube capped instead of imposing on her the additional
pain of having the tube removed?
Terri is supposed to be in a "persistent vegetative state." That
description has an unfortunate, dehumanizing aspect. A vegetable is
something that we eat. Ironically, it derives from the Latin vegetare,
which means to enliven, activate, animate or quicken. Terri is not
brain-dead or comatose. She is a human who cannot function at full
capacity. Humanity is something that we are, not something that we do.
We are human beings, not human "doings." Dehumanizing the handicapped
not only lessens them but us.
Michael Schiavo, Terri's estranged husband, reported (five years after
she became handicapped) that Terri once remarked that she did not want
to live on life support. If the report is accurate, does it also mean
that she wished to undergo an agonizing death by starvation? Does the
so-called right to die include the right to be tortured? There seems
to be little difference between starving her and giving her strychnine
except that the latter would be faster and perhaps less painful.
Either set of circumstances would be a homicide.
How did we come to a point that we are arguing about denying food to a
human being, about a culture of death rather than a culture of life? A
review of developments in Nazi Germany might be enlightening. The Nazi
atrocities were based on a philosophy that made the "quality of life"
more important than the "sanctity of life."
The Nazis slipped into the holocaust by seven recognizable steps. 1)
There was an acceptance of mercy killing to put people out of their
misery. 2) When Germany suffered a severe economic crunch efforts were
made to remove "useless" expenses from the budget. That led to the
killing of the chronically ill with no hope of recovery (Terri
Schiavo?). 3) Next came killing of the elderly who were without
relatives and resources but were a burden to the state. 4) This was
followed by the elimination of bums, beggars, gypsies and hopelessly
poor people. 5) Then came the economy of eliminating people who were
drawing welfare. 6) It was then the turn of the ideologically
unwanted, political enemies of the state, "religious extremists,"
"disloyal" individuals who were holding the government back from
providing every citizen a better quality of life. 7) Finally there
came those who in the ideology of the Nazis were evolutionally unfit
such as Jew and those who were not pure Aryans. Once the first step,
acceptance of euthanasia was taken, all other steps followed logically.
Could a holocaust happen here? Yes. A philosophy like that of Peter
Singer that would permit the killing of infants under certain
circumstances could serve as its intellectual underpinning. Indeed,
one may say it has already begun with the killing of 40 million unborn
infants by "legal" abortion. Abortion, euthanasia, cloning and
embryonic stem-cell research represent a belief that certain humans
should control the making and taking of human life. This is not unlike
the Third Reich. Things that were once condemned as a crime against
humanity at Nuremberg are now regarded as acts of compassion.
Terri's death sentence has many implications. Women's and civil-rights
groups are notably absent from defending Terri. Also missing are
leftists who seem to believe in government by the judiciary since
their positions do not gain approval in legislatures. They would like
Judge Greer to be upheld because, as Cardinal Renato Martino remarked
on Vatican radio: "If Mr. Schiavo succeeds legally in causing the
death of his wife, this not only would be tragic in itself, but would
be a great step toward the legal approval of euthanasia in the United
States."
Liberals rightfully are opposed to torture ? except for Terri. They
give the "right to die" priority over the right to live. Some liberals
complain that intervention by Congress is a violation of states'
rights, but they had no such concern for authority of states in court
decisions overturning sodomy laws and gay marriage bans.
Do we want the government to allow people to be starved to death? We
are not speaking here of extraordinary means of life support, but
human feeding. Are we now going to kill Alzheimer's patients who have
lost all capacity for memory and are unable to function without
guidance? What about Parkinson's patients? If sentencing the
handicapped to death continues, people are going to die under the
guise of compassion and understanding when the decision will not
really be about them at all but about the convenience of others. We
will be making life-and-death decisions based on how much trouble it
will be for us to let them live.
There are millions in nursing homes who cannot wash and feed
themselves. In that sense they are very much like Terri. Her lot may
soon be theirs. Roe v. Wade allowed killing human beings in the womb.
Now, beginning with Terri, human beings outside the womb can be
destroyed. Now judges decide who gets food and water.
Dr. Kevorkian was jailed for helping to dispatch people who wanted to
die. How is Terri's case any different?
Msgr. James C. Brunner is pastor of St. Mary's Church in Victoria, Texas.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=43415