If the Terri Schiavo case becomes the new standard for people who are unable to communicate their wishes, it will be increasingly difficult to maintain any standard for life's value beyond what the courts say it is.
The courts' new "standard" can be opinion polls, resolutions passed by the American Medical Association or a whim. Some might think eliminating the elderly would fix the Social Security funding problem without increasing taxes or reducing benefits. Call it "selective reduction." That's what they call aborting one or more babies when more than one occupy a womb. By what standard would that be considered wrong?
If there is no right to live, which comes from a source outside of human will and human whim, why should there be any impediment to a "right" to die? Doesn't society have the "right" to be free of the burdens imposed on taxpayers from people who have "lived long enough" or would have "wanted to die"?
Let's get over these religious restraints and do what's "best" for the most people. Abort "unwanted" babies. Euthanize the unwanted elderly and those in a "persistent vegetative state." Counselors will be available to erase whatever qualms might remain from ages past.
This unraveling of life's threads is leading to a place many people may not wish to go. Having not stopped the unraveling when they could, there is no way they will be able to stop it when they wish. Life is connected. Declare one category unfit to live and all categories are at risk.
Like Terri Schiavo's life.
George W. Law Professor: Obama's "Becoming The Very Danger The Constitution Was Designed To Avoid" | Greg Hengler