Feelings and Failings

While I applaud Sir George's wonderful missive and the appreciate the sentiments therein, I have to point out our own hypocrisy in this sad state of affairs, thusly:

"If our facts are in error our heart is not, and it is the heart of a man that is judged, not his depth of accumulation of trivia and legalisms."

This is what we decry of the liberals.  Their wish to be judged, not on their actions, not on thier results, but merely on the intentions of their "pure, pure hearts".   < / sneer quotes, off >

And it's bullshit, plain and simple.

Terry will die a soldier in the cause of righteousness, just as our honored fallen have given that last, true measure of devotion in Iraq.

And we should mourn her as such, with all honors due a fallen hero.

I am quite in agreement with the outcry of we who side with life, and I'm quite in agreement that we ought petition and demand every truly Constitutional recourse in order to preserve her life.

It's called being a strict construtionist, and is but what we ask of Conservative appointees to the bench.  No matter how painful, we can but demand the same of ourselves.

Her erstwhile husband is a cretian of the lowest order, and ought be investigated fully for suspicion of assault, and soon, of homicide.

While it appears Mr. Shiavo may succeed in the slaughter of his wife, it is more important that a Super-Constitutional precedent not be set by the fervor of those seeking to save her life.

And I'm certainly one of those who believes her life is worth the saving.  But not at the cost of the precedent, my friends. 

I think Steve H. is absolutely correct:

"Conservatives complain that Roe v. Wade and federal firearms laws are unconstitutional intrusions on states' rights. Do we really want the feds to be able to decide how the states will treat the disabled? They already do it to an alarming extent. Perhaps you've heard of the ADA.

The next time we complain about creeping centralization, liberals will rightly remind us of the Schiavo battle. What will we say? Centralization is okay when it suits us?

I believe Terri Schiavo deserves every possible chance. I think it's insane to starve her to death when board-certified neurologists are telling us her capacity for consciousness can only be determined by tests Michael Schiavo refuses to permit. But the harsh reality is that state courts have the power to starve her. State law may not be on her side. Even if it is, and even if the courts have screwed up, it may be that the system has functioned as intended, and that there is nothing more to be done.

State court decisions cause people great harm all the time. Sometimes it's justified, and sometimes it isn't. We live with it, even when the result is the execution of an innocent defendant or the impoverishment of a party which has done no wrong.

Sometimes there is no satisfactory legal answer to a problem.

As for me, instead of calling the judges inept and screaming for appeals and reversals which may or may not be legally sound, I will just keep Terri Schiavo in my prayers. There is one authority that never mishandles an appeal, and it's starting to look like He's the only one we can turn to."  (emphasis mine)

Render unto Ceaser what is Ceaser's. 

Sometimes, there is NO JUSTICE IN THE LAW.  But now, I believe we're better refering our appeals to the Highest Judge of all.

And accordingly, my prayers are with Terri and her family.

Finally, thank you Sir George for the sheer beauty of your sentiment.  I only wish I could have agreed with it more.  But I just can't cross that bridge into the doctrine of feelings and intentions.

That said, I mean you no slight, dishonor nor disprespect.

It's time to hold Mr. Schiavo accountable though.  Fully and completely accountable.

And that's a whole new ballgame.

Comments

[Jack]

I'm sorry to disagree with you in your first surfacing in over a month, but I must for reasons that I will never make public.

You can see my reasons why (except for the personal ones) over on my weblog.

If you want the personal ones, I will reply by email.

I hope you and yours are well.

-Jack

[Rivrdog]

Glad to have you back on the quarterdeck, Sir, but I must also disagree.

This is a tough one for conservatives, especially Strict Constructionists, like ourselves. If I must make an error, it will be on the side of Strict Construction and not on any citizen's side.

I see great danger encoding the tenets of RTL, even though I agree with most of them. The Founders also saw such danger, and that is why we have the Establishment Clause.

The Constitution, and precedents leading to it's modification, must always be guarded against violations of the letter and spirit of the Separations (Powers and Church/State). To do less not only invites in the sort of government we Revolted against 230 years ago, it actually takes the first step of establishing such a government.

The Ship of State will not founder over this slight grounding, but her very Hull must now be hauled and inspected, and repaired if required.

Rivrdog

[Jim]

Rivrdog,

Sir.... I've read your comments over at Grouchy Old Cripple's... and I fail to see how you and I disagree on this? Perhaps re-read your comments there, Steve's at Hog on Ice and then re-read my original post here. I think we're on the same page.

And Jack, if you've deeply personal reasons for your disagreement, I'd not dispute you on them. And yes, I would respect your reasons, even should I find no agreement therein.

My prayers are with Terri and her family.

And guys, just FYI... I may have a new laptop coming relatively soon...just the medicine I need to get back to some regular posting.

Warmest regards, amigos.

Jim
Sloop New Dawn
Galveston, TX

[Guy S.]

Others have said it, and I agree. I would like nothing better than for this young lady (well, younger then me anyhow) to find peace at last. I would hope (as some have suggested, but I have know way of knowing) she feels no pain. I would further hope (despite all the yammering on both sides, cause again we don't know all the facts) every reasonable effort has been made to bring her out of the condition she was in. And last but not least, I am really concerned about the federal government (with all the alleged best of intentions) coming in and intervening in a "States rights" venue. That is the one thing which may at some future day and time bite us all in the butt.

As an aside, great to see you are back (or soon, after the new laptop is in place and running).

[Rivrdog]

Put up a tip jar for that laptop. Even if you already have it paid for, you have to spend a bit more money to get a salt-water resistant and cat-proof model.

Don't go cheap. I got one that passes a milspec 4-foot drop test and I'm glad I did.

[Indigo]

How wonderful to see you back, Jim. Glad I didn't take you off the blogroll. I had faith.

I too am struggling with this issue and have been enriched by yours, Rivrdog's and Jack's input.

Welcome home.

[Juliette]

You've been missed.

[ZiPpo]

Aye, Cap'n. Stand by for heavy rolls as the ship comes about.
Fair winds and following seas …

[Gene Pool]

I have mixed feelings about this. On one hand if it is truly Terri's wish not to be substained by feeding tube; by all means pull it. However; I just can't believe her husband. This just don't pass the "dumb-ass test". It truly is now in the real Supreme Court's hands. I pray for Terri.

Great to to see you back.

[RA]

This issue is not about seperation of powers or judicial activism. It is about one judge making a terribly wrong decision by making Michael Shaivo the guardian. There is plenty of evidence why this should not take place. It looks very fishey to me. I wonder if some of Shaivo's money didn't end up in this judges bank account.

A Federal court could have looked at that crucial decision and given Terri's custody to people who loved her and would care for her. Instead he gave Terri to a scum bag filanderer and a new age evil lawyer, both enamered of the culture of death.