March 18, 2005

What about the sanctity of the Schaivo marriage?

As I write, the feeding tube has been removed from Terry Schaivo despite the outrageous efforts of FEDERAL legislators to override years of unanimous legal rulings in favor of her husband's right to make decisions regarding his wife's health. Thankfully, medical ethicist Arthur Caplan has stated what should be have been obvious to all, especially those who have used the idea of the sanctity of marriage to deny marriage rights to homosexuals (link):

Ever since the New Jersey Supreme Court allowed a respirator to be removed from Karen Ann Quinlan and the U.S. Supreme Court declared that feeding tubes are medical treatments just like respirators, heart-lung machines, dialysis and antibiotics, it has been crystal clear in U.S. law and medical ethics that those who cannot speak can have their feeding tubes stopped. The authority to make that decision has fallen to those closest to the person who cannot make their own views known. First come husbands or wives, then adult children, then parents and other relatives.

That is why Michael Schiavo, despite all the hatred that is now directed against him, has the right to decide his wife's fate. The decision about Terri's life does not belong to the U.S. Congress, President Bush, Rep. Tom Delay of Texas, Florida Governor Jeb Bush, the Florida Legislature, clerics in Rome, self-proclaimed disability activists, Operation Rescue founder Randall Terry, conservative commentators, bioethicists or Terri's parents. The decision is Michael's and Michael's alone.

Remember the recent debate about gay marriage and the sanctity of the bond between husband and wife? Nearly all of those now trying to push their views forward about what should be done with Terri Schiavo told us that marriage is a sacred trust between a man and a woman. Well, if that is what marriage means then it is very clear who should be making the medical decisions for Terri? Her husband.
Peggy Noonan couldn't be more wrong when she urges Republicans to act because "no one will mad at you." I am mad at them. How dare they assert that they know better than the countless judges and doctors who have reviewed the case in detail over the past fifteen years? And what has happened to the conservative notions of limited government and respect for rule of law? It is abundantly clear that power has gone to the heads of the Republican leadership in Washington, for they consistently ignore the judiciary's role as a co-equal branch of government (have they read the U.S. Constitution lately, or ever?).

March 15, 2005

Try this at home....

Guess I need to work on my knowledge of "proof," but oh well -try the test yourself at The Alcohol Knowledge Test written by hoppersplit on Ok Cupid.
Bourbon
Congratulations! You're 123 proof, with specific scores in beer (60) , wine (100), and liquor (104).

Screw all that namby-pamby chick stuff, you're going straight for the
bottle and a shot glass! It'll take more than a few shots of Wild
Turkey or 99 Bananas before you start seeing pink elephants. You know
how to handle your alcohol, and yourself at parties.



My test tracked 4 variables How you compared to other people your age and gender:
You scored higher than 39% on proof
You scored higher than 86% on beer index
You scored higher than 95% on wine index
You scored higher than 94% on liquor index
Link: The Alcohol Knowledge Test written by hoppersplit on Ok Cupid