Monday, March 21, 2005

Where's the ACLU?

The drive to deprive Terri Schiavo of food and water while incapacitated is every bit as much an assault on her fundamental civil liberties as it is on the "right to life" proscribed by her religion.

Why? Because, absent her clearly expressed wish to die, no permission can be granted to kill her. Michael Schiavo has overruled the bid of her parents to take over her care solely on the grounds that Terri herself had expressed a clear wish to die and that it was incumbent upon him to see her wishes carried out. But now that Michael Schiavo himself has undermined this fiction and recanted its supporting testimony on several occasions, she can no longer be presumed to want to die. (That Terri may have tried to express the desire to live should also be relevant, to say the least.)

Therefore, permission to kill cannot be conferred by the government to Michael Schiavo because Terri's fundamental right to life and liberty cannot be infringed, even by the government; only Terri can grant that permission. Due process does not empower the government to ignore evidence which invalidates the very authority granted to them, by Terri, to implement that due process. That is especially true when that authority seeks to deprive her of fundamental liberty. An argument by the court that due process was followed but simply failed to take into account its own lack of authority would provide no excuse since information establishing the error is in the public domain and has been disseminated prior to her death. Nor would such an excuse be tolerated by anyone when a human life is at stake, especially the ACLU.

So: WHERE IN THE NAME OF COMMON SENSE IS THE ACLU? Their home page, which mentions nothing about the Terri Schiavo case, would imply by omission that no civil liberties are at stake, yet their lead article on today's home page clearly shows the opposite, as they are engaged in the rights of spousal abuse victims to protection from the courts, the very issue at heart in the Terri Schiavo case:

On March 21, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Castle Rock, Colorado v. Gonzales, a case that will determine the accountability of local law enforcement for failing to enforce court orders that protect victims of abuse by a spouse or acquaintance.

That is their lead story. Terri Schiavo on the other hand is nowhere to be found. The juxtaposition of these two cases, so similar in nature, so close in time, is stupefying.

It's clear to anyone who knows Michael Schiavo intimately that he himself is a serial abuser who needs a restraining order. That information is also available in the public domain. Thus, while the Pinellas County court may claim to have an excuse to ignore it, there is no excuse for the ACLU to do the same. No excuse whatsoever. None.


Anonymous Brian said...

Actually there was a communication from the ACLU to Terri Schiavo's lawyers, to the effect, "Well, if you can find any evidence that Terri engaged in terrorist activity resulting in the death of Americans, maybe we can protest her torture, as we are doing for the detainees at Gitgo. But as the case stands now, it's just not that interesting."

1:01 PM  
Blogger RD said...

Selective litigation, like naked self-interest, doesn't impress me much. If they want to select the civil liberties they defend, they ought to change their name to "ASCLU". They could really do better here. If they realized how Terri Schiavo doesn't play into the strong suit of the euthanasia agenda, we'd have something.

1:36 PM  
Blogger Doc NOS said...

So wrong. Do you even read what you write? This is simply inappropriate medical therapy and constitues assault on it's unwilling victim: TS.

TS's husband did not overrule a bid... - he's her husband, next of kin, and has turned down 10 million to step down as her medical decision maker.

Stop this sickening disinformation: PLEASE

4:26 PM  
Blogger PMC said...

"Thus, while the Pinellas County court may claim to have an excuse to ignore it, there is no excuse for the ACLU to do the same."

Fear not, although it may not be publicizing its position, the ACLU is not ignoring the Schiavo case. In fact, the ACLU of Florida is very much involved and even put in an appearance before Judge Whittemore in the U.S. District Court this week. Predictably, however, that appearance was in opposition to the Schindler's motion for an injunction restoring Terri's food and water. See the proof here (click on "Michael Schiavo's Opposition", and scroll to the end):

Gotta love the ACLU -- on the wrong side again.

10:41 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Excellent, love it! roger moore volvo taking adderall and marijuana online pharmacy adderall Adderall problem Cheapest gucci watches uk Mikes big cock 1986 mitsubishi mirage Professional awning cleaners Instructional tennis camps north carolina Little tits lingerie Super bowl xvi pontiac cold adderall order online

4:48 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Very cool design! Useful information. Go on! film editing classes

12:41 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home