[Marxism] My two cents on the Schiavo case

Joaquín Bustelo jbustelo at bellsouth.net
Sat Mar 26 21:46:21 MST 2005


The Schiavo case is quite straightforward and uncomplicated. 

The state of Florida has two relevant legal norms. One is that even a verbal
expression of wishes is binding. The other is that, absent such a statement,
the spouse has final say.

The opinion of her doctors, over a very long period of time, is that she is
in a persistent and irrecoverable vegetative state due to brain damage
caused by oxygen deprivation.

The husband's testimony is that she said under these sorts of circumstances
she wouldn't have wanted to be kept alive. Both acting at her explicit
direction, and on his own right, he made the decision. It was his to make. 

The parents disputed that, claiming that because she was a Papist, she
couldn't possibly have said that. The courts have found this claim
unconvincing. And there is nothing in the Florida statutes that says if
you're a Catholic the Pope gets to decide. 

The challenge to the husband's decision was a Papist plot from the
beginning, inspired by some priest who decided to take a break from child
molestation and "counsel" the parents instead. That's all its ever been. If
you look at the "demonstrations" to "save" Schiavo (CNN the other day had
not just one, but TWO live video feeds of one such event), it's the same
handful of fetus fetishists plus a few Papist cadre, some in full religious
drag, some passing as normal people.

Because of this challenge pushed by the Papists, the relevant issues were
litigated, relitigated, a re-relitigated to death in the state courts. The
state executive and legislative branches have meddled in this incessantly
and repeatedly, as have now the federal legislative and executive branches,
ordering the federal judiciary to take the case. 

The courts have well-nigh unanimously told the parents and their priests,
and the priests' politicians, to shove it. 

In terms of the law, it is an entirely simple, straightforward, and settled
question: who decides what medical treatment is in the best interests of a
patient? The patient does, and, in the case of a married person, where no
instructions are available from the patient, the spouse. The parents of a
spouse have no more right to meddle in this aspect of the decisions a
married couple make than in any other. It isn't really a question that
should have been litigated at all. It is a matter of settled law.

The Papist cabal doesn't like this. I understand their motivation. They want
to establish the legal principle of "right to life" so that women are forced
to have more children for their pederastic priests to molest.

And of course given the ultra-medieval and hyper-corrupt U.S. judicial
system, anything can be litigated nearly ad infinitum no matter how absurd
the claim. 

Now media outlets (I was going to say "republican media outlets" but that's
redundant) have all been pounding the drums on this in a campaign carefully
orchestrated by Karl Rove. About a "culture of life." About "agonizing
decisions." About a "clash of values." It is ALL, entirely, completely, 100%
bovine excrement. 

The coverage is not because this is a "compelling story." I work in a
newsroom, a bourgeois newsroom of one of the big corporate/republican
outlets, and there isn't a person there who believes that. This was a
20-second two-headed-dog end-of-newscast story. Has been for a decade or so.
It's been transformed into a mind-numbing orgy of round-the-clock brain-dead
stupidity at corporate orders. This Schiavo story has been around for a
decade, and that's the way it's always been treated until Karl Rove decided
a week and a half ago that even THIS stupidity was better than leaving the
press to its own devices now that Tom Delay had been caught again neglecting
to take his bribes legally.

Joaquín





More information about the Marxism mailing list