David Limbaugh’s “More Thoughts on Schiavo” helps to bring into focus what part of the legal battles we have seen is objectionable and what parts are less so. He rightly reminds us that not all poor decisions are judicial activism.

Donald R. May’s “Terri’s Case — It’s All About Money, Power, and Our Constitution” is also very worth reading. He reminds me of “Brain-Damaged Woman Talks After 20 Years,” the case of a brain damaged woman who suddenly regained the ability to speak after 20 years. He also points out Study Reveals Disabled Patients Like Terri Schiavo Show Awareness.” I think that I have seen something along these lines somewhere else, but I am unsure. Regardless, it is a remarkable example of the limits of simply having some strange doctor talk to a patient and expecting the patients eyes to be able to track the doctor. There is much more to awareness than just your ability to react in visible ways.

Mr. Limbaugh has, in his post above, come to the point where he is starting to understand how a relative of Mrs. Schiavo might be tempted to resort to illegal measures to save her life at this point. My mom reached that point rather more quickly, her personality is like that. I myself cannot say she is wrong, I do not believe it can be right to accept a wrong such as this.

Two bits of science news today. “Classic maths puzzle cracked at last” talks about patterns in numbers. Mathematicians were apparently surprised as they discovered how prevalent these are, but I am not. It is the same sort of argument that is being made when you look at the finite ranges in which life as we know it could exist.

The other is ““>Startling Scientists, Plant Fixes Its Flawed Gene,” which suggests there may be more to heredity than Mendel’s laws and DNA. If so, this would raise the explanatory bar for evolution significantly higher, as a mutation must get past this extra set of non-DNA based accuracy checks. Why have we not noticed this before? Perhaps because it was not looked for?

The next step is Justice Anthony Kennedy. From the AP News:

An emergency filing to the high court would go first to Justice Anthony Kennedy, a Reagan appointee who has staked a moderate position on social issues.

Kennedy would have the option to act on the petition alone, although on previous emergency requests involving Schiavo he has referred the matter to the full nine-member court.

Jenn explains: “there are certain justices assigned to a district. they can order stays on their own if the petition comes from their own districts.”

“Last Efforts to Stop Terri’s Euthanasia” has another account of someone the doctors looking at Mrs. Schiavo would have concluded was vegetative.

“Nazis: Pioneers in medicine” is Pat Buchanan’s take on this.

Michelle Malkin repeats a question asked earlier: How will this affect the treatment of Alzheimers patients?

I have learned that the 11th Circuit Court has refused to order the reinsertion of Mrs. Schiavo’s feeding tube. One of the three judges dissented. The AP leans fairly heavily towards death in “Schiavo Appeal to Reconnected Tube Denied,” but perhaps I am giving them less credit than I should; they do mention

In court documents, the couple said their daughter began “a significant decline” late Monday. Her eyes were sunken and dark, and her lips and face were dry.
“While she still made eye contact with me when I spoke to her, she was becoming increasingly lethargic,” Bob Schindler said in the papers. “Terri no longer attempted to verbalize back to me when I spoke to her.”
Louise Cleary, a spokeswoman at Woodside Hospice, said she could not discuss Terri Schiavo’s condition for reasons of privacy.

Michelle Malkin has a better write-up. She also points out the irony that someone who doesn’t have a right to life still has a right to privacy. There is something SERIOUSLY wrong with that picture. David Limbaugh also added to his archive last night, posting an email he was sent which asks a question my mom asked me yesterday. It is one thing for the court to have ordered and enforced the feeding tube removal, a horrid decision, but perhaps our deplorable legal system necessitates it. (I do not think it does, but perhaps.) It is beyond that for them to order and enforce no ice chips or such. If she truly cannot swallow, truly cannot take anything orally, there is no need for this order: such attempts would fail to keep her hydrated, her own family would prevent them to give her a few last hours while they fight for her life. It thus follows that what we have here is not just an attempt to “let nature take its course” without the feeding tube, but to ensure she dies. That is a depressing thought.

David Limbaugh wrote a (for him, and, I suppose, for me also) long post on the Schiavo that has been so much in the news of late, and so much of the focus of my own writing. He expressed some of the concerns that I have felt, but, perhaps, not adequately expressed. Many things that resonate strongly with me. I highly suggest you read it at “Schiavo Writ Large.” I really can’t express things better than he has. He hits the nail on the head with the disquieting way that evidence in favor of her recover-ability, of her consciousness, is being ignored. He hits the nail on the head at the way that the abortion movement is pro-death, not pro-choice. He hits the nail on the head that saving the life of this woman is more important to many of us who pray for her than the possible damage to our governance the efforts to save her may cause. We the living can take care of any damage done later. We can worry about it after we ensure that we will be alive to do it, that our children will be alive to do it. That the next generation will not be aborted, that we will not be killed by a government or “health care” industry that no longer values life.

Ann Coulter looks at some of the numbers, and lack there of, involving female cops in “Freeze! I just had my nails done!.” Chris once asked me a question about what sort of cop I would be more afraid of, we came to the same conclusion her numbers do: the female cop is scarier, because she is more likely to shoot you, being unable to apply what Ann Coulter calls “intermediate force.”

In “For boys and girls, go single sex,” Rich Lowry looks at some differences in the way boys and girls learn, and from that, extrapolates some of the flaws in our current education system. In doing so, he highlights the reasoning that led to the popularity of single sex high schools a generation ago. This conforms to the common sense test. William and Michael, coming through high school, had trouble reading a book if it did not include action or sports in the first few pages. The more restrained classical literature, or, even more, the books assigned in class, had little interest. Why do we read Romeo and Juliet but not Henry V? If you wanted to pick a Shakespeare play likely to encourage guys to get past the unfamiliar verbiage, you would have trouble picking one more likely to appeal to guys than Henry V. Which is not to say that I am not in favor of assigning classical literature. It is something that high school students should be presented with. I just do not remember the grade school texts well enough to use them as an example.

Pat Buchanan’s “Restore the rights of clergy in America” takes a thoughtful look at the loss of tax exemption that faces any Priest or pastor who gives a politically charged sermon.

Judge James D. Whittemore of Federal District Court in Tampa Florida refused to order Mrs. Schiavo’s feeding tube. He thinks that the parents did not, perhaps could not, prove a significant likelihood of wining further court battles, a likelihood they apparently have to prove to get a temporary order from the Judge. I am mostly seeing this AP News article linked to, perhaps because it does not require registration. This NY Times article has the most details on the federal court’s decision though, and this Washington Post article has more background on why she is said to be in a “persistent vegetative state.” I cannot help but note that the details in the Post article are rather more restricted than the details in the lawyer’s writeup that I linked to yesterday. The Post describes her interaction as being restricted to facial expression, but the lawyer has her responding audibly if not really intelligibly as well. I also rather question the use of the person’s ability to track visually and respond to commands as the sole criteria of consciousness, especially after having read Mr. Chuck Colson’s article, posted here. Michelle Malkin continues to track this, and her sources do not rate the odds of success very highly. ☹

David Limbaugh’s blog pointed me at “Last Visit Narrative” which leaves you with the options of believing this lawyer self-deluded, lying, or Mrs. Schiavo not being all that vegetative.