Opinion Page
home > weblog > 2003 > october > blog102103.php
States' Rights. Normally this term connotates historical memories of North vs. South during our Civil War. It was a bit of a real issue, to a point. Certainly the growth and power of the Federal Government should alarm everyone with regard to your freedoms. Now, while the issue of slavery was a legitimate Constitutional issue, basic Human Rights trumped the Southern States' wishes. You see, the order is supposed to put Human Rights above all else, followed by Federal laws, then State, and local laws coming last. Federal laws trump State laws. But your Consitutional Rights trump all. The reason? You are born with them, and they are inalienable. They are a part of you.
So, when a governor (and his willing accomplices, the legislature) try to not only usurp the Federal Government, but also a person's own basic Human Rights, something has to be done. Why? If they can impose their will on your basic Right to Life (promised to us in our Constitution), then none of us are safe. Not in anything that we do. The Right to Life is interpreted to mean not only that we live, but how we live. We have the Right to live in poverty, or in wealth. We have the Right to guide ourselves as we sit fit. If we don't want to eat, then we have the Right to starve.
Which brings me to the case of Terri Schiavo. She is the vegetable who is lying, unable to eat or drink on her own, in a bed. Her husband has told doctors that she never wanted to be kept alive by artificial means. Her parents have sued to keep her on feeding tubes. The woman cannot move. She has been this way since 1990. She cannot talk, eat, drink, or move. Her parents say that she can learn to eat, although no proof of this exists.
Her parents have tried every legal remedy the court system afforded them. They took the case to the Supreme Court, but the lower court ruling that her husband can speak for her (and he wants the tubes removed) stands intact.
So, what to do? Easy, you call the Governor. And Jeb Bush is willing to do their dirty work. He has pressed his legislature to rush through wording specifically designed to address her exact circumstances, authorizing him to restore her feeding tubes against her and her husband's wishes.
Why am I so opposed to the Governor keeping this woman alive? Well, I believe in a person's Right to self-determination. Also, I believe that we are a nation of laws. That means, that a Governor cannot make a law to supercede Federal law or the U.S. Constitution. And that is exactly what he is trying to do. This law is clearly unconstitutional. It would never survive legal challenges. All they are doing is torturing this poor woman some more. Can you imagine being unable to move for 13 years? Unable to eat, speak, or move for 13 years is an eternity of punishment. Let this poor woman die with some dignity.
But, as I've warned repeatedly, we must be especially conscious of basic Human Rights. If we let them take them away from someone else, then who will protect us?
Previous
day's rant
If you have ideas, comments, or criticisms, .