Democrats have joyfully jabbed conservatives who have hoped to
use any potentially legitimate path of government power to save
Terri Schiavo.
“Don’t you like limited government?”
“What about federalism?”
“I thought you hated judicial activism!”
There is some validity to these criticisms. Not as much as the
Democrats would like, considering that states’ rights was their
strongest issue for a long time, but some validity nonetheless. If
I were going to suggest the Republican distinctive, I would say
it’s the dignity of the individual in a moral universe. Fits with
being against slavery, for the women’s vote, against socialism, for
freedom of contract, and against abortion.
Although we like federalism and limited government, as means not
ends, conservatives (and libertarians, I think) are also quite
attached to slippery-slope arguments. Terri Schiavo’s case is
pregnant with possibility as regards the slippery slope. Let’s see
what this one looks like.
America watches Terri Schiavo die over a prolonged period from
dehydration/starvation.
More attention is paid by everyone to things like living wills
and other legal instruments. More commonly, husbands and wives will
be explicit with each other about detailed situations.
Many stop and ask, why did Terri have to die of dehydration? Why
couldn’t she have been well-cared for to the end and finally
delivered via an overdose of morphine or some other quick, painless
finisher?
The euthanasia movement gains significant momentum.
Assisted suicide is legalized in a significant portion of the
states or the Supreme Court federalizes the issue as it has
abortion. Justice Kennedy’s “sweet mystery of life” reasoning
extends private discretion to decisions about the life and death of
dependent, helpless persons.
America attains the moral status of, say, the Netherlands.
Having broken through the barrier of taboo, euthanasia is
eventually applied to the disabled newborn population.
It is no longer assumed that a disabled child is going home with
parents. The “fourth trimester” becomes as potentially deadly as
the first three for “defective” children, who are already targeted
for destruction as part of the campaign to reduce birth
defects.
We begin to hear about therapy groups for post-euthanasia
parents in the same way we hear about post-abortive women suffering
psychic trauma.
Post-euthanasia parents receive as little sympathy as
post-abortive women.
Everyone outside the hard core religious communities forgets
what a Down Syndrome child looks like, or sounds like, or loves
like.