Name:
Schiavo Judge Recusal Demanded
Wednesday, March 02, 2005
The student body at the University of Florida in Gainesville, has called for the immediate recusal of Sixth Judicial Circuit Court Judge George W. Greer in the guardianship case of Theresa Marie Schindler-Schiavo. LinkMissouriConservative -- These students are right on the mark. Judge Greer is by no means an impartial party in this case nor is Michael Schiavo's Attorney George Felos. According to DiscardedLies.com and FreeRepublic.com there is evidence suggesting Judge Greer, Michael Schiavo, and Schiavo's Attorney George Felos (a known right-to-die activist) may be in collusion to bring about the murder of Terri Schindler all in the name of a political agenda. Perhaps the strongest evidence is the fact that "Woodside Hospice" (better described as a death factory) is run by "Hospice of the Florida Suncoast" where, until recently, Felos was a board member. According to their website the hospice mission is to:
- Provide dignified, quality comfort care that enhances the lives of dying people and their families. [That's all well and good if the people you are "caring" for are ACTUALLY DYING!]
- Assure the long-term mental, spiritual, physical health and general well-being of survivors after loss. [OR ELSE!]
- Lead and influence the health and human services community in the care of all people affected by end-of-life issues. [so that at some point in the future we can get rid of all human beings we deem useless. Funny, the more things change the more they stay the same, eh Hitler?]
- Shape public opinion and policy on issues related to death, dying, grief and bereavement Be the center to enhance the quality of life for those affected by death. [This, of course, assumes that individual's "quality of life" needs, should, or can be "enhanced" by this hospice and that this hospice's definition does not "progress" people's quality of life to an early grave.]
This writer's strong feelings aside, this mission seems compassionate to the casual observer but what if the individual under the hospice's care is not dying or was not progressing toward death save at a natural pace (after all, we are all dying the day we are born) until they were admitted to this hospice? What if the hospice is, in fact, an instrumental catalyst, not only in the deterioration of Terri's condition and eventual death, but in others under its care as well? Doctors in this case have testified that Terri can improve with the proper care. Why then is Terri not improving? Is it because these experts are wrong? Is it because the hospice inept? Is it because the hospice is judicially barred? Or is it because those who are "caring" for Terri are not, in fact, motivated by what is actually best for Terri but by a political agenda?
If you are reading this thinking that perhaps the court IS doing what is best for Terri then I submit to you that you are either an euthanasia activist or ignorant about this case. If you are the former, then here is my advice to you: save the world from your self-loathing (George Felos pay close attention) and do to yourself that which you advocate for those who cannot defend themselves. PRACTICE WHAT YOU PREACH! If you are the latter, then I encourage you to read more about Terri's case and get INVOLVED because if the court succeeds in killing Terri, your life is forfeit and at stake just as much as hers. Why, because the American judicial system is based on the principle of Stare Decisis.
If the possibility exists, however slight, that Terri can recover should not then she be given this chance? If not, then why? Take a look at these pictures. Does this look like a person who is a vegetable or brain-dead?
Terri right after her injury
This is a recent photo of Terri:
It looks like those monsters are doing a great job of "caring" for Terri. On March 18th, they will get what they want. They will get to kill Terri.
If you advocate her death the please explain to me why YOUR life is any more valuable than hers and why you deserve to live and she doesn't. Perhaps you believe her life has no value because she is unable to feed herself and is therefore a drain on society and the economy. Guess what? The NAZI's held this view too and mass murdered Human Beings whom they deemed to be a liability for Germany. Don't like that comparison? Ask yourself whether Steven Hawking has a right to live? Last time I checked he could not feed himself either. Nevertheless, no one is advocating that he should be murdered. Her inability to feed herself is Terri's only crime and for this her sentence is death. We are about to torture and execute her in one of the most inhumane ways possible, starvation. Even convicted felons on death row have more rights and die in a more humane manner! They are given a general anesthetic and are executed quickly. If you believe Terri should die, then god help you if you are ever physically unable to feed yourself because you may find yourself fighting for your life in the same fashion but because polite society has deemed that it is more "humane" to kill you, you will die despite your fight and you will have no one to blame but yourself.
Get invovled in this fight! If not for Terri's sake, then for your own.
