| |
Schiavo II Die religiös indoktrinierten Eltern machen eine sachliche Auseinandersetzung um das Grundproblem der Sterbeerleichterung schlicht unmöglich. Es bleibt zu hoffen,
daß der
Oberste Gerichtshof ihrem Einspruch nicht folgt. Das amerikanische, christlich-religiöse Fundamentalisten sich in nichts von den religiösen Fundis des Islam unterscheiden ist nichts neues. Aber es kann und darf nicht sein, daß Fanatiker
in das Leben anders denkender eingreifen. Wir kaltherzigen Libertären denken tatsächlich, daß wenn schon Geld aus entwendetem Privateigentum (Steuer) für humane Aufgaben dieser Art verwendet werden soll, der finanzielle Aufwand der seit 15 Jahren mit Schiavo getrieben wird, ausreicht, um vielen anderen, die medizinischer Hilfe bedürfen, eine
angemessene Behandlung zukommen zu lassen. Es muss das Ziel bleiben Vertragsfreiheit zu erhalten. Heißt: Sterbeverfügungen sollten, auch für junge Menschen, eine Selbstverständlichkeit werden.
Mehr zum Thema hier: 
http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/0,1518,347892,00.html or here http://www.samizdata.net/blog/ SPIEGEL ONLINE - March 23, 2005, 03:26 PM
URL: http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1518,347892,00.html
SPIEGEL's Daily Take
The Schiavo Effect
The disturbing case of US coma patient Terri Schiavo has Europeans buzzing about America's Christian agend -- and scurrying to write their own living wills. Also, France faces "humiliation" if voters reject the EU constitution and Europe is slowly choking down the Wolfowitz pill.
A quirk of the courts -- and of the Christian right -- has made Terri Schiavo into a household word. Here a protester pleading for Schiavo's life.
Do you have a living will? Most don't, and frankly, just considering the gruesome task of writing one sends shivers up our spines. Still, with the tragic case of US coma patient Terri Schiavo making headlines across Europe, many on the old continent are wondering what they would do -- or want their families to do -- if the unspeakable occurred.
In Germany, for example, news programs and papers on Wednesday are abuzz with commentaries exploring the scary shadows that separate life from death and looking at the God-like ability to choose who should live and who should die.
For the most part, socially liberal Germany tends to side with Schiavo's husband, who has been fighting for the right to let his wife -- a vegetable for the past 15 years -- die. Her parents, however, insist she would want to live and after failing to get Florida court approval to keep their daughter alive they -- stunningly -- got a nod from
US President George W. Bush. Bush's intervention has so far come to naught; the case has since been reviewed by a federal court which upheld the decision to remove the feeding tube.
But it is Bush's decision to step in that has many scratching their heads, and indeed, such a presidential intervention in a case involving a single, previously unknown woman seems extraordinary. Some German commentators have lashed out at the Bush administration for gutting states' rights by labeling the Schiavo case an exception to the rules.
And, despite Bush's efforts to avoid turning the case into a precedent, his involvement is problematic. Essentially, Schiavo's family managed to get America's increasingly influential religious right to push her case under the noses of Congress and onto the radar of the nation's born-again Christian president. One can't help but wonder if this
means that US laws can be changed for those with enough political pull to present themselves as exceptions.
But while Germans stew over what they fear are yet more signs America is headed off the religious-right deep end, their real concern is for themselves. For two days, commentators have admonished Germans to conquer their queasiness and write a living will. Interestingly, most assume that Germans would prefer death to muted life. On the popular
evening news program "Tagesthema," commentator Georg M. Hafner insisted Tuesday night that the Schiavo case should send a message to everyone to " write down what you want to happen when you want to die but can't." The conservative daily Die Welt on Tuesday called making a living will "the requirement of the hour" because society has become so
hands-on that it has even begun to intervene when life "has reached its natural end." The news program "Heute" has posted an info box on living wills on its Web site. And in Wednesday's Berliner Zeitung editorial writer Maritta Tkalec writes "if it were to happen to me, then let me die in peace." (2:25 p.m.CET)
French leaders are shifting into high gear in order to get their people to vote "yes" on the EU constitution. That includes appealing to the nation's greatest weakness: pride.
What is up with the French? Is the nation that used to be one of the European Union's biggest cheerleaders turning into a group of fickle euro-skeptics? A recent French opinion poll shows that most French voters plan to give the EU constitution a thumbs down in the country's May 29 referendum -- and this despite the fact that it was penned by
their very own haughty ex-Prez Giscad d'Estang and is being pimped by almost all their political elite. The constitution needs the support of all 25 member states to take effect making France's potential non serious indeed.
Why all the negativity? Part of the problem may be that the French have lost confidence in their politicians and -- in the flashy manner so inscrutably French -- have opted to say so by either threatening to abstain from voting or insisting they will vote no. This is, after all, a nation that has transformed striking into a national pastime.
Vive la Revolution! Still, the fuss has put Chirac in hot euro water. If he -- leader of one of the EU motors -- can't keep his people on board, what future, really does the European dream really have? On Tuesday, Chirac won a big victory when EU leaders agreed to significantly rewrite laws that would open up Europe's services market. The
French -- along with the Germans -- fear that the law would have made it easier for cheap labor from Eastern Europe to steal their jobs and livelihoods. The bigger truth, however, is that Chirac (along with most other European leaders) has done a lousy job of explaining and selling the EU constitution to its citizens.
Now France is trying to change that. Chirac's party is enlisting the help of pop idols to help his cause and so far has rocker Peter Gabriel and French actress Emanuelle Beart working to push voters to say "yes." Politicians are also doing what they can. On Tuesday, Dominique de Villepin, the flamboyant, poetry-writing diplomat turned Interior
Minister appealed to France's other Achilles heel -- its pride -- when he went on public radio to insist that a "no" vote would reduce France to perpetual global wimpiness. "If we want a submissive, dominated France, a "no" vote will pave the way for that," he said. Other politicians opted for even dirtier tactics, insisting that a "no" vote
would pave the way for Turkish EU accession, something most French violently oppose.
Villepin -- still known as France's anti-Iraq war poster boy -- last year penned a book called "The Shark and the Seagull" in which the strong predatory shark represents the Bush White House, while the gentle, graceful seagull represents Europe, particularly France. If France votes "no," Villepin warned during his radio gig, the nation would be
"in a corner, reduced to a minor role...It would be a humiliated France." The seagull's wings, he implied would be clipped. (1 p.m. CET)
Europe softens, but only a little, to Bush loyalist Paul Wolfowitz.
Is Paul Wolfowitz really that scary? Reactions from Europe last week to his nomination by US President Bush as the next head of the World Bank would have one believe that he is the second coming of Lucifer. And really, if you just replace those floppy ears with horns...
This week though, Europe's peristaltic reflex seems to be slowly managing to force the bitter pill -- coated as it is with the promise of avoiding a confrontation with the US -- further and further down its esophagus. Germany, Italy and the United Kingdom have all said they would not block his appointment and German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder
even offered what can almost be seen as a tepid endorsement. Maybe we will be "pleasantly surprised" he said (reaching for another glass of water.)
Concern, though, remains. European Union finance ministers, meeting in Brussels this week as part of a European summit meeting, have expressed concerns about Wolfowitz's suitability for the post. "There is some concern about the way Mr. Wolfowitz intends to handle the policy of the World Bank," said Luxembourg Economics Minister Jeannot Krecke
on Tuesday. German Finance Minister Hans Eichel said that while Wolfie is a high level candidate, "there need to be more discussions before" he is confirmed. Wolfowitz is expected to be invited to Brussels before the end of the month so Europe can probe his position on development issues.
Specifically, many in Europe are concerned that Wolfowitz's appointment, when seen in the light of other recent (and unpopular) Bush appointments (aka John "the-UN-building-should-lose-ten-floors" Bolton as US ambassador to the United Nations) is a sign that Bush is attempting to spread the tentacles of neo-conservatism worldwide. Wolfowitz, it
is feared, might turn back the clock to the 1980s and early 1990s when the Bank promoted the so-called "Washington Consensus," which required bank creditors to radically liberalize markets in order to get World Bank moolah. The policy was, with the notable exception of a few East Asian countries, disastrous.
The ten years since, under outgoing Bank prez John Wolfensohn, have seen a sharp departure from the Washington Consensus model and one that many would like to see continue. Regarding Wolfowitz, German Development Minister Heidemarie Wieczorek-Zeul told the influential German weekly Die Zeit, "Our approval will be heavily dependent on whether
Wolfensohn's legacy of reform will be continued." (11:20 a.m. CET)
|
|
