Monday, March 28

A NATION OF LAWS: FOR WHOM?

Are you aware that the United States Supreme Court -- the highest court in the land that has refused on four different occasions to hear appeals filed on behalf of Terri Schiavo's God-given right to life -- has agreed to "consider whether Texas and other states can execute 51 Mexicans who say they were improperly denied legal help from their consulates," according to this Fox News report? Among those fifty-one Mexican nationals are five gang members who were convicted in U.S. courts of "raping and murdering Jennifer Ertman, 14, and Elizabeth Pena, 16, in Houston in 1993."

Are you aware that the United States Supreme Court -- the highest court in the land that has refused on four different occasions to hear appeals filed on behalf of Terri Schiavo's God-given right to life -- rejected an appeal today "to reinstate a state law requiring girls under age 18 to get parental consent for abortions execpt under the most dire medical emergencies," according to this Fox News story? And, further, did you know that in doing so the Supreme Court was upholding a decision of the notoriously liberal, San Francisco-based, 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals?

Does it make you angry that the Supreme Court will grant a hearing over the right to life of convicted Mexican nationals, but predictably dismisses out of hand and without comment an emergency application to have Terri Schiavo's feeding tube reinserted?

Seems if you're a hapless, handicapped, cognitively-disabled, American woman married to a philandering husband bent on your death by dehydration and starvation, the U.S. Supreme Court has no time for you, your civil rights, or "due process" guarantees (too bad Terri isn't an illegal alien).

But, then again, just remember this is the same court that overturned a law in Nebraska that made partial birth abortion illegal -- a ghastly procedure in which an unborn, sentient, human being, usually in the late second trimester of its development, "is partially pulled from the womb, its skull punctured, and its brains then suctioned out."

A court that sees no immorality or patent illegality in destroying a helpless human being's brains is not going to get too excited about the gruesome death of a woman who some neurologists claim has a non-functioning brain. Makes you wonder who is really "brain-dead."