« So Says the Brit | Main | Tom and Terry »

March 21, 2005

Schiavo Numbers

Via Think Progress, comes this new ABC poll:

- 70% of Americans say it is inappropriate for Congress to involve itself in the Schiavo case.

- 67% of Americans “think the elected officials trying to keep Schiavo alive are doing so more for political advantage than out of concern for her or for the principles involved.” (Just 19% believe the elected officials are acting out of concern for her or their principles.)

- 58% of Republicans, 61% of independents and 63% of Democrats oppose federal government intervention in the case.

- 50% of evangelicals oppose federal government intervention in the case, just 44% approve of the intervention.

- 63% of Catholics and a plurality of evangelicals believe Schiavo’s feeding tube should be removed.

Looks like America isn't quite as stupid as the Republicans thought, huh? If you haven't read Digby and Amanda on the subject, it's time you did. As I said this weekend, Democrats should be fanning out to the media and repeating the simple refrain that this is none of the government's goddamn business. Not out of political gain, but because this is truly none of the government's goddamn business! Here, finally, Democrats agree that the government is in full overreach. We agree that in cases like this one, small government is better. Let's take this moment to draw the line.

A few other notes: What, exactly, is the Christian argument against choosing death? Not to be flip about it, but isn't this exactly what God chose for his son/self? God, after all, is an omnipotent being. If He didn't want Jesus to die on the cross, Jesus doesn't die on the cross. But Christ's purpose on earth had been filled, that's why God didn't have him stagger to his feet, dust himself off and continue wandering the countryside. In what way, then, wasn't that a sort of euthanasia? And, given the involvement of the Romans, in what way wasn't it an assisted suicide?

I know the pat response to that is life and death are up to God, not us. But no one denies that the only way for Schiavo to regain cognitive function would be a miracle. We've all seen the scans, her mind has liquified. Assuming her parents want her kept alive in the hopes of recovery and not as some plush toy, isn't a miracle as likely once the feeding tube has been removed as it was when she was still receiving liquified nutrients? Indeed, isn't all this argument over whether or not she should be kept in stasis really a way of denying His will? If He wanted to end all euthanasia, proving that the disconnected and condemned can rise from their hospital beds despite science's most informed predictions would be a pretty nifty way to vindicate his followers.

To be clear, I'm not trying to concoct clever theories to discredit religion. These are general theological issues that are getting little to no attention. We've somehow accepted this mass illusion of Christianity as a simplistic, pro-life, pro-war, pro-Republican force in the world without ever stopping to wonder whether the latest actions conducted in the name of the church sync up in any way with scripture. We've allowed Bush to connect this "culture of life" idea, which so far as I can tell means nothing at all, with the Bible. But the Bible, at least the Gospels, are pretty clear on their role -- Jesus is the Messiah, treat each other well until he gets back (which he clearly stated he'd do before the folks he was talking to died). From there we go to Paul who invents some theology that makes the religion more portable, but the basic nature remains the same. As for "culture of life", whoever would like to define it must somehow unite a distaste for abortion, an appetite for war, a rejection of guaranteed health care, a rollback of environmental protection, and a desperate desire to sustain the functionally dead. Trust me, that's not an agenda prescribed in scripture.

Lastly, I'd love to see some numbers on living wills in the coming months. I bet their numbers will skyrocket.

March 21, 2005 | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c572d53ef00d83421dd4453ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Schiavo Numbers:

» L'affair Schiavo from Grammar.police
David Velleman: To: House Government Reform Committee From: James David Velleman Re: My Advance Directive Having discussed with my wife how I wish to be treated in case of irreversible brain injury -- a private matter that I choose not... [Read More]

Tracked on Mar 21, 2005 12:24:21 PM

» Poll Watch (Terri Schiavo Edition) from Blog of the Moderate Left
Every so often I see something that restores my faith in my fellow Americans. This poll is it. Despite the fact that the newsmedia continues to hammer this issue from the right, Americans aren't buying it. What's more, the vast majority of America... [Read More]

Tracked on Mar 21, 2005 1:02:44 PM

» As Though To Breathe Were Life from Politics and War
Dan Koffler asks:Jamie noticed a similarity between the way that the social right fetishizes the death of Jesus and the continued agonized existence of Terri Schiavo. But the question is, why is it that in one case, the object of... [Read More]

Tracked on Mar 22, 2005 12:09:30 AM

Comments

Dude. Christians worship a guy who suffered a long, miserable horrible death. And then came back from the grave to hang in heaven with God the father. In order to go to heaven, even the Son of God had to suffer. See?

Posted by: Roxanne | Mar 21, 2005 12:56:00 PM

I agree wholeheartedly. Ten years ago, my mom had to make the agonizing decision to remove my grandmother's feeding tube--and my Grandmother, though comatose, had far more congitive ability than Terri Schiavo. Was my mom a murderer who tortured my grandmother to death? Or was she a daughter carrying out the wishes of a fiercely independent woman who would never have wanted to live in those conditions?

Sorry. I know my grandmother, and I know my mom made the right decision. And but for my uncle (who is Catholic--like that has anything to do with it) being unable to agree and recruiting Randall Terry, we might have been involved in the same crazy world as Terry Schiavo.

This isn't the government's business, beyond simple adjudication. It damn sure isn't Congress' business, and we need to make that point crystal clear. It sure looks from here like the party of big government intruding in your personal life is the Republican party.

Posted by: Jeff Fecke | Mar 21, 2005 1:08:38 PM

"Looks like America isn't quite as stupid as the Republicans thought, huh?"

Delay: "Well if they ain't stupid, we'll just have to MAKE them stupid." (to secretary) "Get me Fox News."

Posted by: Billmon | Mar 21, 2005 1:19:27 PM

Add to that, you've got the Pope who's been "suffering by example" lo these many months, as the numerous Saints and martyrs who also found God through their suffering.

But, I think the Christian Right is interested in this case because of it's implications for Roe V. Wade, which is a case based in large part on "viability" of the fetus outside the womb. If you remove "viability" and "consent" as a determinant for keeping Schaivo alive, you may be able to apply it to other cases.

Posted by: Roxanne | Mar 21, 2005 1:24:53 PM

Roxanne -- Agreed. And I believe that if we start publicly knocking down the false rationales, someone will eventually give up the primary one.

Posted by: Ezra | Mar 21, 2005 1:37:02 PM

In the newspaper today, I saw a woman holding a sign which says, "Let Terri go home to her family." Now, I am not aware that the Schlinders want to take her home. They would need a whole lot of technology at their home, along with expert helpers for her care. There's a lot of ignorance out there.

I'm wondering why all the pro-lifers aren't holding vigils for the 1522 military dead in the Iraq War, and the thousands of Iraqi dead. I guess they are only selectively pro-life.

Posted by: janeboatler | Mar 21, 2005 2:04:20 PM

Anyone who mentions the Pope (except you, Roxanne) in this matter needs a frigging head-check. The Pope's body is crippling, but his mind is acute. He is not losing his mental faculties. Schiavo's mind, on the other hand, is partially liquified.

Here's some more flippancy. Remember how angry and shrill Republicans were in 2004 and John Edwards said that if John Kerry was in the White House, signing off on stem cell research, people like Christopher Reeve would "get up out of that chair and walk again"? I remember the snarky Drudge headline for that: "BE HEALED".

How in HELL are these Republicans now defending those cultists in Florida who think a woman who's spent 15 years in bed with a liquified cerebral cortex could "recover"?

Posted by: Gary Johnston | Mar 21, 2005 2:06:33 PM

There's also the point that people who are ideologically committed pro-lifers (as opposed to people who are theoretically against abortion or euthenasia but don't think about it all that much one way or another) are committed to the idea that when it comes to being alive, a functioning brain doesn't matter. I recall that Ronald Bailey, in an article on the stem-cell controversy in Reason Magazine, said that the argument of the pro-research side, his side, is that "brains, not genes" are the determining factor in personhood. The ideological pro-lifer disagrees and says that you're a human being if you belong to the human species, even if you have no brain or if you're just a blastocyst.

So the mainstream (not just liberal) view of the Schiavo case, which is that she's basically dead already because her brain is gone, is the exact opposite of the ideologically conservative view, which is that even if she has no brain, even if she will not recover, she's still a human being and has full human rights, just as an embryo is a human being with full human rights. It's not a view that can be called mainstream in any sense (as we're seeing in polls, even a sizable chunk of pro-life people don't see things the "pro-life" way on the Schiavo case) but it is hugely influential among conservative pundits and conservative politicians, because these people are ideologically committed to being pro-life in every possible case.

There's also the fetishization of "innocence" going on here too. The justification for being anti-abortion and pro-death-penalty is that the guilty should die and innocents should not. I can just about see that as a legitimate view, but in practice what it means is that ideological conservatives are constantly arguing for the rights of people who are "innocent" in the sense of having no way of thinking for themeselves (embryos, brain-dead people). It's more than a little creepy and you can't help wondering if it's related to a wish to see these almost-people as uncorrupted and unspoiled by the evil culture that the ideo-cons spend so much time railing against.

Posted by: Maestro Anonymo | Mar 21, 2005 2:11:00 PM

Romans 5 deals with the theology of one man (Jesus) dying for the sins of all, since one man (Adam) was responsible for the sins of all. Romans 5:19 is the operative verse: "For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous." Jesus' death was, to a Christian, not capital punishment, since it was not pursuant to the laws of man. It was not euthanasia -- in fact, despite the choice of a peculiarly painful method of execution, Jesus died relatively quickly (though not without pain). Jesus' death was somehow just another moment in His eternal life, the moment at which His sinlessness and truth were revealed to all.

For the theology of it, I can't quote a chapter and verse but it seems to me that there is probably nothing in the Bible about death and dying more specific than there is in Field of Dreams: "Ease his[/her] pain." When we are locked in a dispute between two parties who both claim to have superior knowledge of the will of another, Christianity ought to impel one of them to step out of the picture for the sake of humility. If no one will take even this simple, sanctified step, then theological arguments are lost on them.

Posted by: diddy | Mar 21, 2005 2:12:29 PM

ashes to ashes, says I.

Posted by: praktike | Mar 21, 2005 2:52:39 PM

At their extremes, right and left wing are indistinguishable because the only salient characteristic is insufferable arrogance.

Posted by: opit | Mar 21, 2005 3:50:53 PM

A word on those numbers, btw. I think the caution you see on the part of Democratic legislators has been that the polls there don't reflect any of the intensity of feeling. So the right wing is extremely mobilized, whereas everybody else is going to scratch their heads, express their disagreement, and move on.

Posted by: praktike | Mar 21, 2005 4:07:49 PM

This one touches another button. There is no greater proof that someone doesn't know how to lead than refusing reasonable autonomy. Delegation of authority presupposes delegation of responsibility, a point lawyers and suits would destroy. Yet I despise micromanaging as ineffective, poorly informed and morale destroying. Disagreeing with someone is not the same as overriding them. That is why confrontational politics are a poor arbiter of family needs.

Posted by: opit | Mar 21, 2005 4:17:53 PM

It seems to me that the radicaligious crew are really unChristian in their approach.

If Terri is "in there," she's tied to a body that cannot recover. If she is NOT "in there," the body is an empty shell, with less conciousness than a cocker spaniel.

In either case, the Christian thing would be to let her go, not prolong (if the soul is still there) an existence that offers no hope, no future, no "life." Even a fetus has the chance to develop. Terri has no such chance. Responsible medical personnel have tested six ways from Sunday, and tell us this. No pandering political pundit can change it.


Ed


Posted by: Ed Drone | Mar 21, 2005 4:53:03 PM

Another word of caution on the poll. Isn't it something of a push poll? We know how much disinformation is out there, and people are using their own "facts" put together by the right-to-life groups to form their opinions.

Posted by: praktike | Mar 21, 2005 6:57:27 PM

To go back to the original question, the Catholic argument (I won't speak for verious Protestant groups who may or may not agree) against suicide is that it involves committing the sin of despair coupled with an act that removes all possibility of repenting for that sin.

Christ's death is no way an act of despair. It could more accurately be likened to a soldier throwing himself on a live grenade to save his buddies. In both cases, death is an inevitable consequence of the action taken but it is not the goal--Christ did not want to die, but He could not do what He had to do without dying.

I'm not arguing that Terri Schiavo would be committing suicide if the tube remains removed--obviously she's in no condition to form any intent to commit suicide. More useful information can be found here. In Terri's case, I'd say the following passage is most relevant:

"When death is imminent one may refuse forms of treatment that would only result in a precarious and burdensome prolongation of life. There is a presumption in favor of continuing to provide food and water to the patient, but there is a stage in the dying process when even these may no longer be obligatory because they provide no benefit."

Based on the medical reports it sounds to me like Terri is at that point.

Posted by: Kevin Brennan | Mar 22, 2005 10:32:13 AM

It seems the Republicans are truly on the fringes of American thought!

Posted by: Les Ismore | Mar 23, 2005 9:03:08 AM

...But Christ's purpose on earth had been filled, that's why God didn't have him stagger to his feet, dust himself off and continue wandering the countryside...

Actually, Christians refer to Jesus' staggering/dusting/wandering post-death as his resurrection -- generally considered to be a pretty big deal.

Posted by: Jennie | Mar 23, 2005 10:04:43 PM

sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES

sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES

sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES


VIDEOSBLOG
VIDEOSBLOG

VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG VIDEOSBLOG

Posted by: JEROGatch | Sep 3, 2006 3:33:26 AM

托盘
托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
木制托盘
纸托盘
木塑托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
钢托盘
木托盘
钢制托盘
托盘
塑料托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
南京托盘
南京钢托盘
上海托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
南京托盘
南京钢托盘
上海托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
纸托盘
南京托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘
广州托盘
杭州托盘
成都托盘
武汉托盘
长沙托盘
合肥托盘
苏州托盘
无锡托盘
昆山托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
纸托盘
南京托盘
南京钢制托盘
南京钢托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘

托盘
托盘
托盘
托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
塑料托盘
塑料托盘

托盘
塑料托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
铁托盘
托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘

托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘

托盘
托盘
钢托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
塑料托盘

托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘

托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
托盘
托盘
托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
铁托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
木制托盘
纸托盘
木塑托盘
柱式托盘
波纹托盘
镀锌托盘
南京托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘
广州托盘
托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
铁托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
木制托盘
纸托盘
木塑托盘
柱式托盘
波纹板托盘
镀锌托盘
南京托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘
广州托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
铁托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
木制托盘
纸托盘
木塑托盘
柱式托盘
波纹托盘
镀锌托盘
南京托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘
广州托盘
托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
铁托盘
木托盘
塑料托盘
木塑托盘
柱式托盘
波纹板托盘
镀锌托盘
南京托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘
广州托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
铁托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
木制托盘
纸托盘
木塑托盘
柱式托盘
波纹托盘
镀锌托盘
南京托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘
广州托盘
托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
铁托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
纸托盘
木塑托盘
柱式托盘
波纹板托盘
镀锌托盘
南京托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘
广州托盘


托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
托盘
塑料托盘

Posted by: peter.w | Sep 15, 2007 4:36:16 AM

The comments to this entry are closed.