SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : PRESIDENT BUSH - UNFIT FOR COMMAND -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (421)4/3/2005 11:45:51 PM
From: paret  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 660
 
Death and Justice
Men's News Daily ^ | April 1, 2005 | Joe Mariani

The growing cult of death won a victory in the battle to devalue life with the judicial murder of Terri Schiavo. Sentenced to die on hearsay alone, for no crime greater than being brain-damaged and voiceless, Terri slowly starved to death while nutrition and water were withheld from her by court order. Every attempt to reverse the court's decision or alter Terri's state-sanctioned fate was blocked by the judicial system, a system that has lost any right to use the word "justice."

For decades, the pro-death secularist Liberals have been whittling away at the respect for life we once held. They have openly supported anti-life policies, from abortions without parental notification to late-term abortions of viable babies to the "right to die" of people who aren't actually dying. Now, with the death of Terri Schiavo, they have turned the judiciary into a vehicle for killing off the unwanted as well as the unborn. We have been taught to accept death as an easy solution, not an inevitability to be put off as long as possible. Adversity is not something to be faced with courage. Death is merely a "choice," like whether to order chicken or veal.

Once upon a time, before our judicial system decided that unborn children were "nonpersons" with no more right to live than a tapeworm, a judgment like that handed down by Judge Greer would have been impossible. If American culture still had the reverence for life it had just 40 years ago, mercy and reason would have tempered Greer's decision, instead of this soulless strictness about adhering to the letter of the law above all. It wouldn't and shouldn't have been merely a question of who had the right to kill Terri, but whether it was right to do so at all. The slow erosion of our values has coarsened us the to the point where many of us shrug off the deliberate killing of a helpless person by our courts as "probably for the best." This apathetic attitude persists despite the fact that the person in question was in no danger of dying, and had a family willing to care for her for the rest of her life.

In this struggle to weaken our sense of right and wrong, activist judges have taken upon themselves power they were never intended to have. Thomas Jefferson warned us that renegade judges could be a danger to liberty, though even he never imagined they would be a danger to life itself. "To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions [is] a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one that would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy," he wrote in 1820. Time and again we have seen laws written by the elected representatives of the people simply thrown out because they don't suit a particular judge's agenda. Many times judges have dictated to the legislature what laws they should write, as in the case of the Massachusetts Supreme Court ordering the legislature to write a law allowing gay marriage within six months.

Judges tend to support each other to preserve their collective power, as was shown by all the courts involved in the Schiavo case simply ruling that proper procedures were followed without actually looking at the facts and testimony, or calling for up-to-date tests. Even when the Congress of the United States, in a vain attempt to prevent Terri Schiavo's constitutional rights to due process from being violated by the Florida judiciary, passed a law requiring a de novo review of the case, Judge Whittemore of the US District court simply reviewed the procedures again, as had all the judges before him.

Jefferson cautioned that judges would be "constantly working underground to undermine the foundations of our confederated fabric." The respect our legal system once held for life, the mercy and protection our laws afforded the innocent and helpless were integral to that fabric, now picked apart by judicial activism. We may be a nation of laws, but we are no longer a nation of justice.




To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (421)4/3/2005 11:54:20 PM
From: paret  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 660
 
Schiavo: Awakening a sleeping giant
world net daily ^ | April 1, 2005 | David Limbaugh

By David Limbaugh

It is just possible, contrary to my original thoughts, that the tragic Schiavo case will not usher in a slippery slope toward euthanasia, but cause a double-barreled backlash against both the "Culture of Death" and judicial activism.

To be sure, the legal precedent established in this case, at least in Florida, represents an affirmative devaluation of human life and opens the door to further troubling scenarios, involving the state-sanctioned murder of the inconvenient, based on "quality of life" assessments.

But I sense in this nation a growing outrage at the arrogance and unaccountability of our judiciary, and at the cavalier attitude many are exhibiting toward life.

Former San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown said, referring to the Schiavo case, "I think there's a moral question, a legal question, but there's no political question in this matter at all, and it never should have been elevated to that."

You better think again, Mr. Brown. When the public has finally had its fill of this insanity, it may well, through its elected representatives, exercise its political options by launching a counterattack against the courts.

Significant numbers of people were outraged in 1973, when the Supreme Court placed its "holy" imprimatur on the murder of babies in the womb and overstepped its bounds by tying up states on the issue through a constitutional right it manufactured.

But over the last several decades, despite a virtual monopoly by leftist forces in academia, the major media and Hollywood, the public's sentiment toward protecting babies in utero has matured, and its aversion to judicial activism has grown.

People have a sense, if not any particular sophistication in constitutional analysis, that there is something radically wrong with the Orwellian propaganda that "social change" ought to emanate from the courts rather than legislative bodies.

The Ten Commandments monument case, involving Alabama Judge Roy Moore, and now the Schiavo case have brought to light more than any other recent cases, the necessity of legislative or even popular (constitutional amendment) intervention to rein in the renegade judicial branch.

The conflict and turmoil among conservatives alone is sufficient reason for remedial action. In the Moore case, I discovered how deep-rooted feelings are on this matter when I wrote a column defending Judge Moore's position on displaying the monument, but disagreeing with his decision to defy a federal court order.

Many social conservatives were adamant that Judge Moore had a right, indeed a duty, to thumb his nose at the federal court. They were unsympathetic to my concern that his action contravened the rule of law, because they believe the courts have already obliterated the rule of law through their unconstitutional usurpation of authority.

I don't have the space to revisit that issue here, except to point out that it came up all over again – more or less – when the same groups were demanding that President Bush and Gov. Bush each intervene to save Terri's life through unilateral executive action, even after courts had formally barred Jeb from doing so.

I thought the arguments for defiance of a court order were more compelling in the Schiavo case than the Moore case for a number of reasons, including that it pitted a chief executive against the judiciary instead of the judiciary against the judiciary, and an innocent human life was literally hanging in the balance.

While I was torn on the issue, I still had difficulty recommending that the governor defy the courts – even though I strongly disagreed with their decision – considering the precedent it would set for future sinister executives to act any way they wanted and above any legal checks. But it doesn't matter so much what I think. The fact is, the people are mad, and they're not going to take it anymore.

In the end, this case screams loudly for action by state legislatures and Congress against both the Death Culture and judicial activism. Indeed, many of my objections to the Schiavo case have even more to do with what I perceive to be gross injustices exacted by the courts – based on their stunning disrespect for life – than judicial activism.

In response to this Culture of Death, we might witness grassroots efforts across the country to influence state legislatures to craft constitutional legislation specifically to outlaw the kind of barbarism that occurred in this case. Legislatures can write laws to disqualify guardians as a matter of law when they have the demonstrable conflict of interest Michael Schiavo had, to require the appointment of a guardian ad litem to protect the patient, and to prevent death by starvation of non-terminal patients without (or arguably with) explicit written directions on the matter.

As for judicial activism, pending the confirmation of many more constitutionalist judges, Congress might use its Article III authority to limit the jurisdiction of courts in certain areas.

The Schiavo case death merchants may rue the day they allowed their "dispassionate" absence of zeal for human life to go too far. They might just have awakened the sleeping giant of the Culture of Life.

Attorney David Limbaugh is the author of the expose of corruption in the Clinton-Reno Justice Department, "Absolute Power."




To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (421)4/4/2005 12:04:11 AM
From: paret  Respond to of 660
 
AFFIDAVIT STATE OF FLORIDA ) COUNTY OF PINELLAS )

BEFORE ME the undersigned authority personally appeared CARLA SAUER IYER, R.N., who being first duly sworn, deposes and says:

1. My name is Carla Sauer Iyer. I am over the age of eighteen and make this statement of my own personal knowledge.

2. I am a registered nurse in the State of Florida, having been licensed continuously in Florida from 1997 to the present. Prior to that I was a Licensed Practical Nurse for about four years.

3. I was employed at Palm Garden of Largo Convalescent Center in Largo, Florida from April of 1995 to July 1996, while Terri Schiavo was a patient there.

4. It was clear to me at Palm Gardens that all decisions regarding Terri Schiavo were made by Michael Schiavo, with no allowance made for any discussion, debate or normal professional judgment. My initial training there consisted solely of the instruction “Do what Michael Schiavo tells you or you will be terminated.” This struck me as extremely odd.

5. I was very disturbed by the decision making protocol, as no allowance whatsoever was made for professional responsibility. The atmosphere throughout the facility was dominated by Mr. Schiavo’s intimidation. Everyone there, with the exception of several people who seemed to be close to Michael, was intimidated by him. Michael Schiavo always had an overbearing attitude, yelling numerous times such things as “This is my order and you’re going to follow it.” He is very large and uses menacing body language, such as standing too close to you, getting right in your face and practically shouting.

6. To the best of my recollection, rehabilitation had been ordered for Terri, but I never saw any being done or had any reason at all to believe that there was ever any rehab of Terri done at Palm Gardens while I was there. I became concerned because nothing was being done for Terri at all, no antibiotics, no tests, no range of motion therapy, no stimulation, no nothing. Michael said again and again that Terri should NOT get any rehab, that there should be no range of motion whatsoever, or anything else. I and a CNA named Roxy would give Terri range of motion anyway. One time I put a wash cloth in Terri’s hand to keep her fingers from curling together, and Michael saw it and made me take it out, saying that was therapy.

7. Terri’s medical condition was systematically distorted and misrepresented. When I worked with her, she was alert and oriented. Terri spoke on a regular basis while in my presence, saying such things as “mommy,” and “help me.” “Help me” was, in fact, one of her most frequent utterances. I heard her say it hundreds of times. Terri would try to say the word “pain” when she was in discomfort, but it came out more like “pay.” She didn’t say the “n” sound very well. During her menses she would indicate her discomfort by saying “pay” and moving her arms toward her lower abdominal area. Other ways that she would indicate that she was in pain included pursing her lips, grimacing, thrashing in bed, curling her toes or moving her legs around. She would let you know when she had a bowel movement by flipping up the covers and pulling on her diaper.

8. When I came into her room and said “Hi, Terri”, she would always recognize my voice and her name, and would turn her head all the way toward me, saying “Haaaiiiii” sort of, as she did. I recognized this as a “hi”, which is very close to what it sounded like, the whole sound being only a second or two long. When I told her humorous stories about my life or something I read in the paper, Terri would chuckle, sometimes more a giggle or laugh. She would move her whole body, upper and lower. Her legs would sometimes be off the bed, and need to be repositioned. I made numerous entries into the nursing notes in her chart, stating verbatim what she said and her various behaviors, but by my next on-duty shift, the notes would be deleted from her chart. Every time I made a positive entry about any responsiveness of Terri’s, someone would remove it after my shift ended. Michael always demanded to see her chart as soon as he arrived, and would take it in her room with him. I documented Terri’s rehab potential well, writing whole pages about Terri’s responsiveness, but they would always be deleted by the next time I saw her chart. The reason I wrote so much was that everybody else seemed to be afraid to make positive entries for fear of their jobs, but I felt very strongly that a nurses job was to accurately record everything we see and hear that bears on a patients condition and their family. I upheld the Nurses Practice Act, and if it cost me my job, I was willing to accept that.

9. Throughout my time at Palm Gardens, Michael Schiavo was focused on Terri’s death. Michael would say “When is she going to die?,” “Has she died yet?” and “When is that bitch gonna die?” These statements were common knowledge at Palm Gardens, as he would make them casually in passing, without regard even for who he was talking to, as long as it was a staff member. Other statements which I recall him making include “Can’t you do anything to accelerate her death - won’t she ever die?” When she wouldn’t die, Michael would be furious. Michael was also adamant that the family should not be given information. He made numerous statements such as “Make sure the parents aren’t contacted.” I recorded Michael’s statements word for word in Terri’s chart, but these entries were also deleted after the end of my shift. Standing orders were that the family wasn’t to be contacted, in fact, there was a large sign in the front of her chart that said under no circumstances was her family to be called, call Michael immediately, but I would call them, anyway, because I thought they should know about their daughter.

10. Any time Terri would be sick, like with a UTI or fluid buildup in her lungs, colds, pneumonia, Michael would be visibly excited, thrilled even, hoping that she would die. He would call me, as I was the nurse supervisor on the floor, and ask for every little detail about her temperature, blood pressure, etc., and would call back frequently asking if she was dead yet. He would blurt out “I’m going to be rich!,” and would talk about all the things he would buy when Terri died, which included a new car, a new boat, and going to Europe, among other things.

11. When Michael visited Terri, he always came alone and always had the door closed and locked while he was with Terri. He would typically be there about twenty minutes or so. When he left Terri would would be trembling, crying hysterically, and would be very pale and have cold sweats. It looked to me like Terri was having a hypoglycemic reaction, so I’d check her blood sugar. The glucometer reading would be so low it was below the range where it would register an actual number reading. I would put dextrose in Terri’s mouth to counteract it. This happened about five times on my shift as I recall. Normally Terri’s blood sugar levels were very stable due to the uniformity of her diet through tube feeding. It is my belief that Michael injected Terri with Regular insulin, which is very fast acting.

12. The longer I was employed at Palm Gardens the more concerned I became about patient care, both relating to Terri Schiavo, for the reasons I’ve said, and other patients, too. There was an LPN named Carolyn Adams, known as “Andy” Adams who was a particular concern. An unusual number of patients seemed to die on her shift, but she was completely unconcerned, making statements such as “They are old - let them die.” I couldn’t believe her attitude or the fact that it didn’t seem to attract any attention. She made many comments about Terri being a waste of money, that she should die. She said it was costing Michael a lot of money to keep her alive, and that he complained about it constantly (I heard him complain about it all the time, too.) Both Michael and Adams said that she would be worth more to him if she were dead. I ultimately called the police relative to this situation, and was terminated the next day. Other reasons were cited, but I was convinced it was because of my “rocking the boat.”

13. Ms. Adams was one of the people who did not seem to be intimidated by Michael. In fact, they seemed to be very close, and Adams would do whatever Michael told her. Michael sometimes called Adams at night and spoke at length. I was not able to hear the content of these phone calls, but I knew it was him talking to her because she would tell me afterward and relay orders from him.

14. While at Palm Gardens, I became fearful for my personal safety. This was due to Michael’s constant intimidation, including his menacing body language, vocal tone and mannerisms.

15. I have contacted the Schindler family because I just couldn’t stand by and let Terri die without the truth being known.

FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT.

CARLA SAUER IYER, R.N.

The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of September, 2003, by CARLA SAUER IYER, R.N., who produced her Florida driver’s license as identification, and who did / did not take an oath.

terrisfight.org



To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (421)4/4/2005 12:05:55 AM
From: paret  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 660
 


Terri Schiavo: Treated worse than a convicted murderer
The Tracy Press ^ | April 1, 2005 | Steve Wampler

By Steve Wampler

Starved to death because of a state judge's order, Terri Schiavo has been treated worse than a convicted murderer.

Suspects on trial for murder cannot be deprived of their lives without being proven guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt." A strong case can be made that this standard was never met to prove Terri Schiavo preferred death to being disabled and was truly in a persistent vegetative state.

Though many courts have reviewed the Schiavo case, the federal and state judges essentially only accepted Florida probate judge George Greer's findings of fact. And Greer showed a blatant disregard for basic legal procedures throughout the case.

Greer allowed Michael Schiavo, Terri's husband at the time of her February 1990 collapse, to remain as her guardian though Michael has since had multiple girlfriends. He has lived with his current fiance, Jodi Centozone, for close to a decade and fathered two children with her. The relationship of Michael to Terri has been a marriage in name only, and even Greer should have been able to see the massive conflict of interest.

Neither was the Florida judge troubled by Michael Schiavo's poor memory. In early statements, Schiavo said Terri had not spoken of any end-of-life directives. However, years after Terri's collapse, and after he had won $1.3 million in medical malpractice and other legal awards, Schiavo suddenly recalled that Terri had allegedly said she wouldn't want extra measures to keep herself alive.

However, Terri never made such comments to any of her family or friends, according to Terri's mother, Mary Schindler. In court testimony, one of Terri's friends, Diane Meyer, recalled a conversation she had with Terri after watching a 1982 movie about Karen Ann Quinlan. Terri told her friend she disagreed with the decision of Quinlan's parents to remove their comatose daughter from a respirator. As Meyer recalls Terri's statement, "Where there's life, there's hope."

If this isn't enough, a woman who dated Michael Schiavo for about a year in the early 1990's, said she has insight on his flip-flop on Terri's wishes. In an April 2001 deposition, Cindy Shook said that when she asked Michael about Terri's end-of-life wishes, he responded: "How the hell should I know? We never spoke about this. My God, I was only 25 years old. How the hell should I know? We were young. We never spoke of this..."

More than $700,000 of the $1.3 million in settlement money was placed into a trust fund to cover Terri's therapy and medical expenses. But since 1992, Terri received no therapy or rehabilitation. Where has the money gone?

More than half of the trust fund money, with the permission of Greer, has been used to pay noted right-to-die attorney George Felos ($358,434) and another attorney retained by Michael Schiavo, Deborah Bushnell ($80,309). In effect, the money awarded by a jury for Terri's therapy has been used by her "husband" to pay lawyers to help terminate her life.

Nurses who have worked with Terri state that Michael Schiavo has publicly wished for Terri to die. According to the September 2003 deposition of Carla Iyer, who cared for Terri from April 1995 to August 1996, Michael asked "Can't you do anything to accelerate her death?" and "When is that b____ gonna die?"

Michael Schiavo has also refused, with the consent of Greer, to have basic medical tests performed upon Terri. For example, Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) and Positron Emission Tomography (PET) scans are considered standard tools for assessing the extent of brain injuries. Terri never received either test.

When Dr. Peter Morin, a neurologist who specializes in degenerative brain diseases and who has an M.D. and a Ph.D. in biochemistry from Boston University, learned of this information, he offered a sharp reaction to an interviewer.

"That's criminal," he said. "How can he continue as guardian? People are deliberating over this woman's life and death and there's been no MRI or PET." Morin's conclusion: "These people (Michael Schiavo, George Felos and Judge Greer) don't want the information."

Dr. William Cheshire, a neurologist with the Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville, Fla., was asked to study Terri's case for the Florida statewide Adult Protective Services. Chesire came into the case believing it was ethically permissible to discontinue food and water to people in a permanent vegetative state.

After studying Terri's case and meeting her, Chesire concluded: "As I looked at Terri and she gazed directly back at me, I asked myself whether, if I were her attending physician, I could in good conscience withdraw her feeding and hydration. No, I could not...I could not withhold life-sustaining nutrition and hydration from this beautiful lady whose face brightens in the presence of others."

According to Rev. Robert Johansen of the Kalamazoo, Mich. Catholic diocese, almost 50 neurologists all had the same assessment: Terri should be reevaluated and there are grave doubts about the accuracy of Terri's PVS diagnosis. All of these neurologists are board-certified, some are fellows of the prestigious American Academy of Neurology and several are professors of neurology at major medical schools.

When Congress asked Greer under subpoena to keep Terri alive to be a witness, he thumbed his nose. When Congress instructed the federal courts (which are set up by Congress) to take a new look at Terri's entire case, U.S. District Judge James Whittemore and the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals refused.

Many U.S. newspapers, including the San Jose Mercury News, the Los Angeles Times, and the New York Times, all shamefully editorialized in support of withdrawing food and water from an innocent, disabled woman. What they didn't do was accurately or fairly report this story.

If Michael Schiavo wasn't such a callous person; if the judiciary wasn't so tyrannical and had a little common sense; and if our nation's media reported both sides of this story, maybe someone could have come up with a humane solution -- letting Bob and Mary Schindler love and care for their daughter, Terri.



To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (421)4/4/2005 12:07:02 AM
From: paret  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 660
 
In 1920, “The Permission to Destroy Life Unworthy of Life,” was published in Germany. It was a treatise that outlined the legal rationale for allowing “death assistance.” It asserted that those who suffered from brain damage or mental retardation were already in a state of “mental death.”

The book’s authors, Karl Binding and Alfred Hoche, argued that seriously ill patients should be allowed to give their consent to euthanasia. In the case of those unable to consent, a three-person panel should be allowed to make the decision.

Binding and Hoche emphasized the economic burden on society of keeping the “hopelessly ill” and institutionalized alive. The authors argued that euthanasia was the compassionate thing to do for all involved.

“The Permission to Destroy Life Unworthy of Life” provided the foundation for the Nazi philosophy that began with “mercy killing” and eventually led to the Holocaust.




To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (421)4/6/2005 1:12:10 PM
From: paret  Respond to of 660
 
GETTING OFF EASY: BERGER'S CONFESSION

nypost.com

April 6, 2005 -- Regarding your editorial, "Berger's Burglary" (April 4), I must say I am truly disgusted that this guy is going to get away with nothing more than a fine and a temporary loss of his security clearance.
Berger has now admitted that he not only stole top-secret documents from the National Archives but also destroyed them — which means he has been lying all this time.

It also means that he likely lied to the 9/11 Commission.

If the Clinton administration really took the warnings of our vulnerability to a terrorist attack seriously — and acted on them — as Berger testified, there would have been no reason for him to steal and destroy those documents.

Well, at least the feds managed to nail that dangerous criminal, Martha Stewart.

James Imbrogno
Yonkers
****

Sandy Berger and Bill Clinton are kindred spirits.

Both are perjurers. And both have problems with their pants, or the contents thereof.

How can the Democrats accept the behavior of these two clowns?

Kenna Amos
Princeton, W. Va.
****

For several years, Americans have had to endure Democratic conspiracy theorists, who have labored to erode the wonderful unity that Americans displayed following the 9/11 attacks.

But, apparently, the only real conspiracy was the Democrats' effort to cover up the Clinton administration's malfeasance in fighting terrorism.

Berger is just the Clinton-administration stooge who was apprehended.

I can only image the ones that got away.

This is a national disgrace.

Robert Reeg
Stony Point
****

I don't get it.

Berger admits and pleads guilty to removing — stealing, really — documents from the National Archives, a highly guarded and secure federal building, and he will only lose his security clearance for three years?

Why not permanently?

Danny Murtaugh
Mineola
****

How in the world does someone admit to knowingly performing an illegal act but then get to claim that he "accidentally" covered it up?

On the bright side, his security clearance can be reinstated in three years — just in time for Hillary.
Sal Bifulco
Wesley Hills



To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (421)4/6/2005 9:05:53 PM
From: paret  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 660
 
A Silent, Brutal Death-The moral law can never be legislated in ultimate terms by the human mind
Arutz Sheva ^ | 1-5-05 | Ellen W. Horowitz

"The moral law can never be legislated in ultimate terms by the human mind." -- Rabbi Yosef B. Soloveitchik

Make no mistake about the Terri Schiavo case. It was impeccably constitutional and went off without a hitch. This time around, the legislative, executive and judicial branches of the US government executed a flawlessly synchronized checks-and-balances performance. The tenet separating church and state held firm and refused to buckle under significant pressure.

The arguments were compelling and the race against time, heart-wrenching. But make no mistake about Terri Schiavo's death. In a two week period, she was dehydrated and starved to death, sliced open for an autopsy and cremated - and the entire process was scrupulously executed according to the law of the land. America must be so proud.

Pretty gruesome stuff, and that a good portion of the public could comfortably watch this chapter live on CNN, over a plate of lasagna, makes one kind of wonder who's the truly brain-damaged and comatose party.

Make no mistake, Terri's demise was a miserable and colossal moral failure.

Sentencing a brain-damaged woman to death by dehydration and starvation is an embarrassingly barbaric and pitiful solution for a modern, purportedly evolved, world. Regardless of which side of the argument one takes, this should have been a humbling moment for humanity.

How limited and primitive we are.

Much of the discussion surrounding the case circumvented the moral crux of the issue, and instead was directed towards the matters of personal, spousal and parental rights, and whether or not the victim would feel the pain of death.

But behind the scenes, this was clearly a battle between individual rights and moral obligations; between the takers and the givers; and between the material and incorporeal worlds. The hands-down verdict is that we live in a very selfish and material world.

Today, at least in the West, most individuals place great emphasis on the quality and comfort of their personal lives, as well as their personal freedoms and rights. I suppose it's expected and certainly permissible that human beings living a physical existence would naturally tend to gravitate towards, and place emphasis on, the material rather than the spiritual. However, an immense problem is created when a society structures itself on legislative and judicial foundations that, for the most part, underscore personal freedoms and individual rights, while compartmentalizing or excluding religious doctrine based on moral responsibility.

The prevalent attitude of "what's coming to me?", "what's in it for me?", and "what value is it to me?", has created a society of takers and self-centered consumers. This attitude, taken to its extreme, produced a legal system that condoned the taking of a handicapped woman's life and demonstrated a gross disregard for her body and soul. I believe this constitutes the worst possible type of theft. And after all, isn't that what murder is - robbery in the extreme?

Jewish law would not sanction the type of death Terri endured, because traditional Judaism places an emphasis on obligations rather than rights . Our responsibility towards G-d and our fellowman supersedes our personal freedoms.

Although we can't always understand the meaning behind some of our seemingly disproportionate or unfair trials and challenges, we nevertheless strive to accept them as part of a Divine plan. Ideally, any good fortune, assets or possessions one acquires in this world - whether material or spiritual - are to be regarded as gifts or blessings from G-d; life itself being the ultimate gift - even one which appears to be vegetative and physically unproductive.

However, the beauty of the modern world is that we have created tools and support systems that can and should encourage us to face-up to our trials and assist us in carrying our burdens. Those devices, however, should not be employed as a quick fix to rid us of our challenges.

Now, on to the pain...

Neurologists assured us that removal of Terri's feeding and hydration tube would result in a painless death. But even contemporary science recognizes the plausibility that there exists other levels and dimensions of consciousness that our top researchers have yet to discover. Indeed, maybe they'll never be discovered, as comprehending those states could be beyond the reach of our limited intellectual capabilities. Are our egos are so grand and intellect so blinding that we can't acknowledge the existence of a soul? Maybe Terri's soul was hungry, thirsty and tortured for two weeks. Maybe her silent screams manifested themselves through the pleas and anguish of her parents. After all, it was Terri's parents, not her husband, who have a flesh and blood connection.

We're told that she wouldn't have wanted to live that way (I guess we'll never know). But Terri was indeed alive, and seemingly content in her own world - as inconvenient at that world was to others (and isn't that the real issue here?).

When our scientists, doctors, legislatures, judges, intellectuals, and even clerics and family members become cognizant of their limitations and internalize an awareness of something greater than themselves, then the fear of G-d will enter the picture. We humans will then become acutely aware of those responsibilities outside of ourselves. We will become givers and not takers, and we will strive for true justice and morality. When that happens, we will be that much closer to a redeemed world and to finding a truly just solution for people like Terri.