Terry Shiavo Travesty Reveals True Colors of Moral Combatants

March 26, 2005

---

by Mark Weiler

---

The outcome of this tragically developing Terry Shiavo debacle should be of concern to each and every American. A travesty of a U.S. court system is now in the showcase for the world to see. Only in America can the concern for an injured animal supercede that of a human being being methodically starved and dehydrated to death. Yesterday evening while passing by the Animal Planet on TV, I witnessed a woman being led away in handcuffs for the mistreatment of a dog. Did she kill it? No, it was simply, and tragically mistreated.

Led by liberals, democrats as a group have made it a practice of labeling President Bush as a Hitler type as their primary political weapon. The irony is glaring as the same group begins to lay the same foundational underpinnings as the Third Reich did.

Judges have but one role and it’s not brain science. Yet, the judicial system within the United States is crumbling underneath its own weight. "Government by the people and for the people" has morphed into "government by the judges and lawyers", who just oh, by-the-way, happen to be in a very handy "you wash my back, I’ll wash yours" arrangement. Procedures and protocols increasingly trump truth and facts in many cases and at many levels. Common sense and reason are increasingly being thrown out the window in favor of the personal whims of judges across this nation or for procedural concerns which disregard those truths and facts altogether for one reason or another.

Judges are tasked with the very simple, relatively speaking, reconciliation with the evidence before them regarding an issue or an accused person with that of what the laws, federal and/or state, dictate regarding the specifics of the evidence provided. Their task is usually a simple one generally speaking; consider the evidence and rule according to existing laws created by the legislative branches in the federal and state governments in the interests of separation of governmental powers.

The problem is that in order for a proper, viable, and unbiased decision to be reached, all the facts and truths must be on the table in consideration. This is increasingly not occurring however. In many cases liberal activist judges are ever increasingly overstepping their bounds by not ruling according to Constitutional underpinnings and laws on the books and instead ruling in accordance with their own opinions. It is a mockery and travesty of what the founding fathers ever had in mind.

As the Terry Shiavo case goes, recent developments on the conduct of Michael Shiavo regarding his behavior towards his wife, Terry, paint the picture of a little Joseph Mengele in his own right, a real monster of a human being. Common sense demands that believing that Michael Shiavo has not had any hand in Terry’s present condition is tantamount to believing the story of a four-time violent rapist felon as he insists that the woman he is in on trial for raping and killing actually "begged him to have sex with her and then kill her following it."

Yet, liberals, including liberal activist judges along the way, appear to be spearheading supporting this "angel of death" and his stories while ignoring any arguments and testimonies that Terry is not in a vegetative state at all. Naturally they’re all gung-ho about finding out what really happened to Terry given all of the accounts now springing up like crocuses in the springtime, right? Wrong! "Death" is the order of the day for these liberals and democrats. Anything to posture for political gain, eh. What the hurry in seeing the fruits of this decision to a hasty conclusion is, is beyond reason. Nevertheless, in their minds, apparently it cannot wait and be debated for even another week. Nope! They’ve pulled in "their" medical opinions while shutting out many, many others, including those of people formerly in the same condition as Terry.

The notion that Michael Shiavo actually has Terry’s best interests in mind in this point is utterly laughable. Yet, amidst the glaring numerous conflicts of interest for him in this matter, he is the one making the decisions here and doing it with the full support of judges who I suppose demand our respect. I for one have none. Contempt? I suppose, but how can one not have contempt for such usurping of authority and ignorance of facts and data. Does such "professional" behavior and attitude somehow command respect? Methinks not! This present judicial and legal system has gone seriously haywire from what the founders of this great nation, yet diminishing in its greatness at the present rate, ever had intended.

Meanwhile, in near hysterical fashion, NY Congressman Gary Ackerman (D-NY) exclaimed with a straight face that the taxpayers should not be made to pay for Terry’s sustainment of life. To his credit, he is one of the few liberals not cowering like a weasel from the issue publicly. But this, or any liberals complaining about spending, for anything, is as conspicuous as a 400 lb. gorilla sitting on the kitchen table in the morning when one gets up to go fix breakfast. What’s with the sudden bout of "consciousness" regarding spending when spending, again, on anything at all, real or imaginary, is the motus operandi of the same people feigning spending concerns under the present circumstances. Are they to be taken seriously.

Then of course there are the complaints by all the congressional liberals and other political hacks and pundits that "government" shouldn’t be involving itself in this very personal of issues. The answer to this is so ridiculously asinine that it should shame those taking such a position. Since when is the judicial branch of government any less a part of the governments, federal, state, and local, than either the legislative or executive branches? Are the courts private enterprise?

The only difference between allowing this part of the government to control the lives of people in either this or other issues, is that the judicial branch due to the nature in which it is presently being conducted, is far more subjective than the legislative branch simply due to the pervasiveness of liberal activist judges. This is what this issue is all about at its core essence from the standpoint of the liberals in government. And in this case, often "the government" can be reduced to a single person with absolutely no regard for the U.S. Constitution or without any particular set of morals. I seem to remember a man in the earlier 20^th century behaving as such, controlling an entire European nation, enforcing his brand of "morality" correspondingly resulting in the extinction of millions upon millions of people, and for whom a world had to combat to rid themselves of.

Meanwhile, these judges, in accordance with their own personal preferences for morality and utter disregard for Constitutional underpinnings, clearly consider only one side of the issues in both the events and occurrences putting Terry in the state she’s in as well as her current state from a cognitive standpoint. In spite of the fact that several people that went through similar experiences have popped up like the minutemen in the Revolutionary War, decrying that they were also once said to be "vegetative", they cite remembrances of understanding everything that was going on around them as if "being at their own funeral" as one such survivor put it, this seems to make absolutely no difference to anyone with "ruling ability" on the issue. No, they choose the testimonies that they will allow and disregard those that are not expedient for them personally or politically. It is a shame to our judicial system for anyone with a level of intelligence capable of understanding it all.

Boy howdy, but I sure hope to high heaven that no judge, liberal or other, ever has to make a similar decision or anything even close to one for me given the way that the courts in this country are conducted today. In fact, I dread the day that I need a fair judgement or ruling in any court for any issue. The entire Shiavo case paints a very good picture of how run amok and defunct the U.S. court system has actually become. It has come about due to notion of judicial "discretion" having run amok and now having taken the place of the actual laws that judges are supposed to reconcile deviant behavior and other issues against. I hope to God that I never have to appear in court and be at the mercy of any judge other than for routine traffic matters.

And what about Michael Shiavo’s common-law wife? It is inconceivable that she could be "resting peacefully" with some of the personal and eyewitness accounts being aired recently regarding his behavior and statements towards his true wife, Terry. Pleasant dreams toots! A little advice: make sure that you and your children stay on Michael’s "good side." Open and candid statements in the presence of multiple hospital staff have Michael at one point routinely asking when "the bitch" will die referring to Terry.

He is also on record by the same or similar and multiple sources as directly stating that he desires to see Terry dead so that he can have free reign with the money that was won in a civil suit purportedly to assist her in her recovery, yet a recovery which has been openly and directly blocked by "Mr. Compassion" himself, Michael Shiavo. The rest of the accounts paint the picture of someone who’s psychotic and a danger to the public otherwise and not much far off from Scott Peterson. Far be it for the American public, much less the judicial or law enforcement systems to be able to identify such deviance in advance however. I cannot imagine that his common-law wife and children now are "comforted" by these revelations. Somehow a future news item in the making does not appear to be a reach.

Where does it end? Madonna’s on-stage gyrations in very risqué lingerie on prime time TV in the early/mid-80s prompted a debate between an acquaintance and myself while in college at the time. The argument was focused on the ramifications of this single data point. My position was one of how this was a piece, a single brick, in the road being paved towards gross immorality in our nation. It pushed the envelope of decency at the time, yet today, similar and worse can be found freely in very routine places on the internet, television, newspapers, magazines, and even in the open public outdoors.

The "counter-argument" at the time was one of "Oh come on, you’re telling me that because Madonna’s on stage like that means that the morality of the nation is going down the tubes…blah, blah, blah." The answer was not in and of itself, but that yes, it was one of the stepping stones to having some of the most popular programs in the nation being one of a bunch of housewives guilty of infidelities and immoralities let alone numerous other such programs and moral filth that now requires monitoring even on the most "mundane" of networks 24/7 for those with children that should be shielded from such content. Forget the fact that many American adults have absolutely no desire to view such programs either. Then American adults get upset and wonder why their spouses engage in such behavior just like their Hollywood heroes and as the statistics now say is relatively pervasive. Go figure.

Lastly, democrats, particularly liberal democrats and their constituents, seem to have made a hobby of calling George W. Bush a "Hitler" type. Now, either history utterly fails those making such assertions, or those making them possess the intelligence quotient of a tree mushroom. As an extremely brief refresher, Hitler’s goal was to rid the earth of the weak and feeble and those that he and his regime deemed were not worthy of living, most of whom were not weak and feeble. Liberties for making such decisions often fell down to the field level or "court level" as it were. Naturally, these reasons were for whatever they in their flawed logic and wisdom conjured up, were for political expedience and power, and for absolutely no sane reason, very much as several liberal activist judges have done in the Shiavo case.

So again, the question is posed, which ideology is closer to that of Hitler. But why stop at Hitler. Throw in Stalin as well who starved millions that he deemed not worthy of life. Starvation, in the arguments of the "compassionate", is now that starvation is a marvelously peaceful and relaxing way to die. Hmmm…. It appears that the liberal show of "Feed the World" or whatever the "bring food to starving Africans" was called in its day, in song only per typical liberal action plans, was all about ending the heinousness of starvation in Africa. Why, if starvation is such a humane and pleasant way to die all of a sudden? Those with a brain, a conscience, and a grain of honesty know the answer to that.

What has happened between now and then to actually make starvation/dehydration a pleasing way to exit this world? Should we not hasten starvation around the world using this logic, especially in places where "quality of life" does not even deserve to have the word "quality" associated with it. And if it’s that humane and decent, how about a movement amongst liberals to begin applying it to some of those multiple time felons, violent criminals, that cannot seem to add more to this world than the misery that they spread? Somehow methinks that would be hailed as abominable by the same liberal democrats trying to sell notions that this is some sort of very pleasant way to go out regarding Terry Shiavo.

In the meantime, it is time for every American to understand what Hitler and the Third Reich were all about. Liberals and their ideologies are far closer to those same standards set forth by Hitler and his henchmen and Gestapo than any conservatives that I have ever met in my life by a long shot. In fact, the truth be told, it was conservative christian thinking and reasoning that brought down Hitler and the Third Reich. It is high time that such sentiments be openly stated. Liberal ideologies are a step above Nazi fascism with the sole restraint having been the love and provision for freedom in this nation sustained by a hard and fast Constitution written and created by morally principled men possessive of morals completely opposite of those possessed by modern day liberals. Conservatives are the defenders of the Constitution. Liberals are the aggressors towards it.

This Shiavo case should put every American on notice, regardless of whether or not they run out and get a living will, that in the future, a practically endless list of possibilities for one reason or another, they may suffer from same or similar decisions that Terry Shiavo has! This should cause more than alarm given the current discussions of social security short falls very, very soon, coupled with an aging baby-boomer generation. And where’s the liberal AARP on this issue??? There are presently tens of thousands of similar cases around the country and surely infinitely more to come as history progresses. No doubt some of those supporting the "pulling of the plug" on Terry today will as well be impacted regardless of the fact that they have no idea who they are at this point in time.

And just as in the Madonna case described above, this is one of many stepping-stones en route to a "Fourth Reich." It began with abortion. The Shiavo case lays one of the first bricks in the path towards euthanasia and a societal determination of "who is fit to remain alive" under varying conditions and who is not. Alarming? It should be. There is absolutely no room here for not understanding this issue immediately. Terry could very well die any day now barring intervention from another source at this point.

This is all headed towards further government control, NOT less as the liberals would have one believe, in the determination of the fate of individuals per their conditions at one time or another. The difference is that it is not Congress that will be the decision-maker, it will be judges. This should scare the intestines out of every single American. Those at these judges’ mercy had better hope to God that they are rooted in the U.S. Constitution and in set of moral beliefs with "life" as its primary underpinning. Otherwise, hey, it’s whatever that particular judge decides and for whatever reasons he/she decides it. You tell me which one sounds more like Hitler and the Third Reich!

And how comforting to know that liberal congressman such as Gary Ackerman gladly fight tooth and nail for the rights of multiple time convicted rapists and hardened murderers for cable TV and other amenities in prison, at the expense of the American taxpayer. Yet at the same time, taxpayers covering allowing those who have only lived life as positive contributors to live on in times of despair, and those who are victims of unpunished crimes, are considered a waste of taxpayer money. Go figure.

Politically, when it all shakes out, this issue may end up hastening the liberals’ "free fall from Olympus." It may also impact republican politicians in support of this debacle as well. But it is clear now to even novice politicos and pundits, as their stalwarts ride through the streets ala "the emperor and his new clothes", exactly that their goals are solely the retention of power in Washington with absolutely no real concern for the interests of the people of this once great nation or the U.S. Constitution for that matter. It is even less for the people and in particular "future Terry Shiavos."

While most polls suggest, largely based on devious question design, that most Americans support this "pulling of the plug" on Terry, most are missing the mark. It is common for politicians to miss the mark as their personal political gains usually set the tone for their positions. But the American public had better wake up on this issue post haste.

This entire charade is nothing more than a game of Constitutional Russian roulette. Much in the way that those that supported Hitler in his rise to power failed to see the ramifications of his ruling their country, so too Americans now have no idea the Pandora’s box of evils about to be opened if Terry Shiavo is allowed to die for the reasons stated by the judges having paved the way for her death occurring. The underpinnings of this issue will only grow stronger roots once that box is opened. It may take more or less time, but just as with abortion, divorce, and a host of other social maladies, only life threatening, it too will sprout roots like the worst of planters warts.

Baby boomers in particular should take heed given the overwhelming concerns regarding social security issues. Again, where on earth is the AARP on this issue? And again, those with the knowledge of exactly what the AARP really is know the answer to this; they are a part of the problem, not a part of the solution. Why anyone would support judges with whatever brand of morality they happen to bring to the table and often apart from Constitutional underpinnings and provisions, a part of the governments, in potentially determining their viability of life is simply beyond explanation.

If Terry Shiavo dies however, more Americans than now realize, including many that ardently support allowing Terry to dehydrate to death, will regret their shortsightedly backing that side of the argument. In the future, the same types of activist judges "playing god" will not distinguish between political persuasions when making their decisions. It’s easy to say today that "I would never want to live being kept alive with a feeding tube" [or other device], but when push comes to shove, human beings will fight to the core to stay alive, especially for those not in their senior years. It is but a rare few that allow themselves to be defeated so easily. It simply is not human nature to throw in the towel as such. Just ask Nazi holocaust survivors!

In the meantime, if Terry Shiavo is allowed to die, then the government has become by default more, not less, involved in such decisions in the future. Our Constitution will have taken an irreversible hit. And Americans may in the future receive notice along the lines of the following as penned by a friend that recently wrote to me in an e-mail :

"Sorry, sir you have [a broken hip and bad back]. The Federal Quality of Life Determination Department has ruled that your Quality of Life Coefficient has dropped below acceptable levels according to the rulings of Circuit Court Judge Smith. We have a plan where your euthanasia and funeral costs can be wrapped into one convenient package with minimal financial impact to your family and to the American taxpayer."

Can’t see it happening? It’s a cut above some body mass index (BMI) set forth by the government suggesting with the stroke of a pen who is overweight and who isn’t according to a single factor and in utter disregard for a host of other factors. It is so incredibly flawed that it’s next to laughable. Yet, here we, America, are on the brink of a similar standard for life. If this does not scare "Joe American", then I have no idea what is running through "Joe’s" head.

Naturally that "quality of life" index or standard will be arbitrarily determined by some judge whose morals and political beliefs will likely be nothing of the sort of the one whom the decision is being made for. The closer that judge is to being devoid of Judeo-Christian life-honoring morality, the worse off and more precarious the life of the individual in question becomes. But hey, what’s a little shortsightedness in the name of tax savings and the "discretion" or personal opinions of judges, eh.

It may as well be added to someone receiving such notice that the "funds are not available due to the exorbitant costs tied up in the courts hearing appeal after appeal of convicted multiple time felons along with ensuring that violent criminal inmates have more due process and rights than the innocent along with plenty of amenities in the prisons which house them." As liberals would have it, once again, life and even "quality of life" for those contributing nothing to society other than pain and suffering at the hands of their deeds, supercede, and by a long shot in contrast, that of the innocent.

Perhaps when the "Fourth Reich" takes place, if it ever does, Michael Shiavo has a job as the new Secretary of the Department of Quality of Life! That may be a good time to avoid being on Medicare. Perhaps liberals view these developments as good things given the imminent social security cost crisis.