by Sam Bridges (VociferousSam)

In the past few weeks and months, there has been widespread criticism of
Governor Jeb Bush and the Florida Legislature for intervening in the Terri
Schiavo case at the state level. Similarly, there has been much criticism of
President Bush’s administration and the U.S. Congress for intervening at the
federal level. The criticism continues even after Ms. Schiavo’s death.

The three branches of federal government were established to have primary
responsibilities in certain realms of government and to provide checks and
balances so that one branch does not become too powerful or overstep its
primary responsibility. States also have similar distinctions of
responsibilities and checks and balances.

I’m the first to say that government needs to stay out of where it doesn’t
belong. But a major part of government’s role and function is to protect its
citizens and guarantee “due process”. Courts are increasingly acting as if they
are some type of self-imposed divine authority and as if they not only interpret
laws, but establish and enforce laws, as well. The legislative and executive
branches are sometimes forced, and necessarily so, to intervene when
judiciaries legislate from the bench, refuse to exercise “due process”, or
impose their own agenda. And it’s easy to find other examples of this
phenomenon ad nauseum; you need only look at gay “marriage”, the prohibited
acknowledgement of God in public life, the gross misapplication of the concept
of separation of church and state, etc.

Those critical of the legislative and executive branches in this case need to
pause from their judicial genuflection and be thankful that there is a system
of checks and balances in the United States. Furthermore, all sides of the
Schiavo case need to spend some quality introspection time to ensure their
position is consistent with how they view other areas where “due process” may
be jeopardized – the Patriot Act, for example. And for heaven’s sake, why could
Terri Schiavo’s feeding tube not be left in while “due process” was either
confirmed or established?

In the widely accepted practice of advance directives, the patient’s acceptance
or refusal of medical treatment is based on their own assessment of their
quality of life. But I see one key area where the Schiavo case departs from
this aspect of personal rights. Those rights and the resulting decisions are
based on the individual’s assessment their own quality of life, not society’s
assessment of the individual’s quality of life, and definitely not the claims
of a husband with questionable motives and problematic trustworthiness or an
attorney who seems to glorify death and whitewash an agonizing method of dying.

Recent polls show that a majority of Americans approved of detaching Schiavo’s
feeding tube. I had suspected that poll response was largely made based on what
the respondents’ own choices would be, which was then confirmed by other polls
showing 75-80% would choose to have the feeding tube removed if they were in a
similar situation. I, for one, do not want society deciding my fate. I do not
want a court, legislature, governor, or president deciding for me. And I
certainly do not want an adulterous and untrustworthy spouse deciding whether I
live or die.

If someone wants to commit suicide, society can do precious little to prevent
it. If someone chooses to end their life based on their own prior assessment
and documented decisions, society quietly accepts those decisions. But when
society chooses to ignore dubious circumstances in any case such as this and
allows itself to err on the side of death, it fosters a culture of death. If
our government refuses to intercede on behalf of those who are truly innocent
and truly vulnerable, it ceases to be a government of the people, by the
people, and for the people. At that point, it has become nothing more than a
bloody weapon in the hands of a society that embraces murder.

Courts are limited to jurisprudence based on man’s laws. But if laws are
increasingly based on man’s relativism, self-righteousness, arrogance, and sin,
and therefore are necessarily becoming increasingly contradictory to God’s Law
and His ways, the society producing those laws without restraint will
ultimately meet its demise at its own hand or the hand of others.

Some call the removal of Terri Schiavo’s feeding tube a matter of personal
choice and an act of mercy. I call it murder.



© Sam Bridges and VociferousSam.com

-----------------------------------------------------------
Sam Bridges is the founder and chief editor of VociferousSam.com, a website
dedicated to providing insightful commentary on today’s world and culture from
a God-centered worldview and Biblical perspective. He is happily married to a
beautiful Christian woman and is the father of five magnificent children. He
is a deacon, Sunday School teacher, and webmaster at his church.

In addition to the VociferousSam.com website, Sam is a regular columnist for
RenewAmerica.us and TheConservativeVoice.com. His commentaries have also been
published on BushCountry.org, and OpinionEditorials.com. For more information
and commentary, visit http://www.VociferousSam.com.