in our email yesterday morning
From: "Robert Nordlander" delete
To: <gartland1@ delete
Subject: Council for Secular Humanism Issues Statement on Schiavo Case
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 23:30:37 -0600
CSH Issues Statement on Schiavo Case
----- Original Message -----
From: Council for Secular Humanism
The Center for Inquiry - International |
www.centerforinquiry.net
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greetings,
Council for Secular Humanism Issues Statement on Schiavo
Case
AMHERST, N.Y. (March 25, 2005)-Theresa "Terri" Schiavo,
the Florida resident who has spent the last fifteen years in a persistent
vegetative state, has spent recent weeks at the center of a political and
legal maelstrom. The courts have consistently found that her husband,
Michael Schiavo, is carrying out his wife's wishes in trying to cease
life-support measures; meanwhile, parents Robert and Mary Schindler,
arguing that Terri would wish to live, have waged an unrelenting battle to
keep her feeding tube inserted.
Spokespeople for the Council for Secular Humanism (CSH)
say that, as heartrending as the case is, the courts have made the right
decision. In a recent statement issued by the Council, David Koepsell,
Executive Director of the CSH, says that "fundamentalist political
ideologues have seized upon the Terri Schiavo case to make a bold, federal
play against individual liberties." (The text of the statement is included
below.)
"The Council for Secular Humanism praises the Florida and
federal courts' rulings to let Terri Schiavo's decision to die with dignity
stand," Koepsell says, "and we hope that politicians who have interjected
themselves into this personal decision, for cynical political gain, will
think long and hard about what this means for liberty and justice."
Medical ethicist Richard Hull calls the situation a power
grab by religious conservatives and a betrayal of the sanctity of marriage.
"Americans will not stand for the burdens of having to defend family
decisions, confirmed by state courts, before federal panels," he says.
"They will decisively reject such meddlesome moralistic madness and beat
back these assaults on reason and decency." Hull urges all Americans put
their wishes in writing, such as with a living will: "Until the religious
right rediscovers the Bill of Rights," he says, "we must all act to protect
ourselves and presume no respect by others for our informal understandings
with loved ones."
Meanwhile, other spokespeople caution that the choice
might not always be left to the individual: "The public should be made
aware that the Catholic Church owns about one third of all hospitals in the
United States, many without the public's knowledge," warns Toni Van Pelt,
Executive Director of CFI-Florida. "The Church does not recognize
end-of-life directives."
While most Americans may think of secular humanists as a
fringe group, the Council's assessment of the Schiavo case is in accord
with public opinion. Several recent polls (including one by CBS News and
one by CNN, USA Today, and Gallup) show that a majority of Americans
disapprove of lawmakers' intervention in the case. Senator Christopher
Shays of Connecticut has described the situation by saying, "The Republican
Party of Lincoln has become a party of theocracy."
The Hypocrisy of the "Culture of Life"
A Statement by the Council for Secular Humanism
The fundamentalist political ideologues have seized upon
the Terri Schiavo case to make a bold, federal play against individual
liberties. Once again, they have redefined and misconstrued the issues in
the media in order to pursue a religious agenda. That agenda cares not at
all about the dignity or quality of an individual life nor of the
fundamental liberties we, as Americans and as human beings, are supposed to
enjoy. Terry Schiavo expressed her desires when she was a conscious person.
The proper venue for discovering her expressed desires was the courts, and
the lengthy proceedings gave due process to Ms. Schiavo. The conclusion was
that she never intended for her vegetative shell, with no medical
possibility of recovery, to be kept "alive" through a feeding tube. The
courts ruled that her express wishes, as discovered through numerous
witnesses and lengthy hearings, should be respected. Yet this ruling, which
is consistent with a respect for individual liberty, and the ability of a
person to choose dignity in death, angered and mobilized those who view
life as little more than the beating of a heart. Their religious
motivations are clear. Their "culture of life" views life as nothing more
than a vehicle for "souls," and the complex system of human attributes
which make us persons, such as autonomy, creativity, emotions, and other
essential elements of humanity, mean nothing. This is why so-called
conservatives are supporting federal intervention now in the most personal
of decisions. The hypocrisy of this stance couldn't be more clear.
President Bush recently argued that we must "err on the
side of life" whenever possible. This was the argument that some governors,
including Illinois Governor George Ryan, have made in suspending death
sentences until a full judicial review could be made. This decision was
supported by the stark fact that a number of death-penalty cases have been
reversed in light of new technology and new evidence, and so, it made sense
to err on the side of life by having a full judicial review. In Texas, then
Governor Bush never suspended a single capital sentence for further review,
even when attorneys for convicts may have slept through some of their
proceedings. There, he did not err on the side of life. Has he experienced
a sudden change of heart? In the Schiavo case, the courts have reviewed and
reviewed, and testimony has been taken, and appeals have been made
surpassing the number and thoroughness of even a death-penalty review
process. The conclusion has remained the same: Terry Schiavo did not want
to have her body kept alive if her mind, that which makes her a person, was
dead.
Now, these politically motivated religious ideologues,
who wish to push their narrow view of "life" on the populace by act of law,
would have you believe that Terry Schiavo is a piece of property, and that
despite her wishes, her parents should be given the chance to "take her."
Terry Schiavo is not a piece of property. She was a person who expressed
her wishes, and neither her husband nor her parents can usurp her role in
deciding the course of her death. This is the essence of being a free
person, the ability to choose for oneself, and this is the essential
justice of the courts' decisions to respect her wishes, expressed by a
free, autonomous, mature person.
The Council for Secular Humanism praises the Florida and
federal courts' rulings to let Terry Schiavo's decision to die with dignity
stand, and we hope that politicians who have interjected themselves into
this personal decision, for cynical political gain, will think long and
hard about what this means for liberty and justice.
Signed,
Paul Kurtz, Chair, Council for Secular Humanism
.
|
