Every so often I realize I do need to defend my honor, so I will. Apropos of this comment I shared with Jezechelle over AIM last night, I will have to admit that, on its own, the all-caps comment does sound like such a vulgar reference to God, Jesus and the like:

jezechelle: what’s bugging me the most is the lack of tolerance, real tolerance not the fake made up shit by liberals, lack of tolerance for anyone who has a differing view. If you aren’t blogging for terri, protesting for terri, or wrapping up your life with her plight you are subject to disgusting plays of lack of tolerance

Jay: durn, i’m amazed i haven’t been demonized yet for calling that terri schiavo corpus what it is

jezechelle: I wonder if [this friend of ours]’s seen it yet

Jay: if he does i’ll post a reply to his comment like this next line:
Jay: “GO ON, DEMONIZE ,MEEEEEEEEEE!!! I BELONG TO THE CULTURE OF DEATH!!! I WANT TO EAT THE BABY JESUS AND VOMIT HIS PARTS ALL OVER THE FEET OFTHE VIRGIN MARY BECAUSE I DON’T GOD-DURN THINK LIKE YOU!!! BRING THE BITCHFORKS AND THE TORCHES, HONEY, BECAUSE IT’S WITCH HUNTING TIME IN SCHIAVO LAND AND THE RULE OF LAW MEANS NOTHING!!! HAILSATAN!”

The context of that comment was that it would be my reply should someone try to demonize me in the comments to this post I wrote, in which I said:

Here’s the kicker: since that Terri Schiavo corpus is a living shell but has no humanity left, I find no moral objection to her parents keeping her alive. If they want to take care of what’s left of their daughter, for whatever reason, fine. I am not one to deny people of any sentimental attachments to family members.

But since I make vulgar statements about Jesus and the like, why stop there? I confess: I worship the Devil, but I’m such a weak follower that I can’t even kill my own blood orgy victims. Instead, I drink pig blood bought from the grocer. Such a weak devil worshipping critter I am.

All sarcasm aside, I am astounded at the level of rhetoric that everyone has engaged in on this issue. The demonization is coming the most from those who advocate Terri Schiavo’s parents’ cause. Not have an opinion because you think it’s none of your business? Why, it’s cowardice! Not have an opinion because you think you don’t know all the facts but are stupid enough to admit that? Why, you’re not doing your legwork as a human being! You should CARE!!! So much has been written that amounts to this: “If you don’t agree with me and don’t want that miraculous sign of the pernicousness and persistence of the human will’s desire to survive, then you are a cruel, vicious bastard who wants an innocent dead… and of course, you want to eat the baby Jesus and throw up his parts at the foot of the Virgin Mary”

I’m done doing meta-examination of how people talk about this issue. Here are two other things that I am wondering about.

First: I know in the event of ambiguity that the side of life must be taken. I, too, hold that opinion and in fact do not, will not advocate pulling that feeding tube out. Fine. But if the husband claims to know the will of his wife through something that she said in the past, how much value should be placed on his word?

The second, and more important consequence of that first question is this: just what does it take to impeach the word of a husband as guardian of an invalid? All the bloggers I have seen who have insinuated that Michael Schiavo had something to do with Terri Schiavo’s catastrophic system failure claim that he’s a sleazy rat bastard who wants to cremate his wife in order to hide evidence. That, my friends, is innuendo. Some call it common sense, but in the halls of the courts where sometimes the whole truth is not arrived at but a reasonable and accurate assessment of the truth is, innuendo does not proof make.

I am quite certain that if the parents of Terri Schiavo had enough proof, they would have been able to have Michael Schiavo’s guardianship revoked.

My question basically is, just how much of the rule of law and procedure—the method to the madness that prevents anarchy itself—are you willing to sacrifice to save this life? How many stops are you willing to pull out? And when the time comes that the situation is reversed, when Congress steps in to meddle with someone else’s private family business, will you be gracious enough to step back and not criticize those who engage in the same behavior you are showing? When the day comes that a judge decides to apply the law to a case—the application of which is something you disagree with—will you be magnanimous enough to take a step back and not criticize Congress should it decide to step in? Will you be consistent?

So I’m breaking my poliblogging hiatus for one post to discuss the name that has become a symbol of what’s everything wrong with government, no matter who’s in charge: Terri Schiavo, or rather, Terri Schiavo’s corpus.

Truly the situation has made many a philosopher out of all us (including myself) and questions over the matter of souls, and minds, and rights to life, and human killing… it’s all become white noise to me at this point. Here, from the Wolfson Report (prov: John Cole) , is what strikes me most important:

Theresa’s neurological tests and CT scans indicate objective measures of the persistent vegetative state. These data indicate that Theresa’s cerebral cortex is principally liquid, having shrunken due to the severe anoxic trauma experienced thirteen years ago. The initial oxygen deprivation caused damage that could not be repaired, and the brain tissue in that area continued to devolve. It is noteworthy to recall that from the time of her collapse, and for more than three years, Theresa did receive active physical, occupational, speech and even recreational therapy. There is evidence early in her records of care that she said “no” during physical therapy session. That behavior did not recur and was not further referenced.

In recent months, individuals have come forward indicating that there are therapies and treatments and interventions that can literally re-grow Theresa’s functional, cerebral cortex brain tissue, restoring part or all of her functions. There is no scientifically valid, medically recognized evidence that this has been done or is possible, even in rats, according to the president of the American Society for Neuro-Transplantation. [...]

I, for all my talk of being a recovering Catholic, do not believe in something called a “soul,” if such a soul is that eternal thing that persists after death that carries with it the consciousness of the person. I believe there is such as a thing as a “mind,” and that mind is the sum total, and the gestalt, or totality, of brain activity in a human brain.

The Terri Schiavo corpus has none. As far as I have seen from the facts at hand—and from reports of doctors who have examined her—that… thing in a Florida hospital is a mindless shell bereft of any humanity.

Here’s the kicker: since that Terri Schiavo corpus is a living shell but has no humanity left, I find no moral objection to her parents keeping her alive. If they want to take care of what’s left of their daughter, for whatever reason, fine. I am not one to deny people of any sentimental attachments to family members. Heck, I love my mom too; if this happened to her, unless she wrote a living will expressing her wishes, heck, I would keep her corpus alive too. Terri Schiavo’s corpus is not aware of where it is, or what is happening to it. It’s just… THERE, and it’s so hard, even for me, to wrap my fingers around that concept.

Let us note that legally, it is not the parents’ call who decides to keep the walking corpse. That is the husband’s right, and the Republicans who are moving Heaven, Earth and all nine circles of Hell are making a few big mistakes here. As much as I don’t trust the husband, no legal challenge proving malice in his part has stood the test.

The same Republicans who beat their chests on the sanctity of marriage and the size of government have engaged in the most sincerity-driven hypocrisy I have ever seen in my life. The Democrats yet again have shown that they will say only what their focus groups say is the politically fortuitious thing. These two parties disappoint me today beyond all belief, and I’m not the only one.

On the basis of the evidence at hand, the Terri Schiavo corpus is what it is: a shell, a living, mindless shell and the right to decide over what happens to it belongs to the husband. Should that right be transferred unto her blood family, I see no wrong in maintaining it, as I see no human mind suffering and trapped in a body like that one.

And if there’s something heartfelt that I should be saying, don’t hold your breath. This problem was all because of heartfelt shit, and I’m done “feeling” about this issue. Let’s leave that to our politicians who left their brains at home.