January 25, 2005
Is life a right or is it a privilege granted by the government?
By: Charles W. Heckman (Sorry, no email address was provided)
The refusal of the United States Supreme Court to hear the appeal in behalf of Terri Schiavo comes at a very fitting time--the 60th anniversary of the liberation of the Auschwitz Concentration Camp.
What do the Nazis, Communists, and ACLU have in common?
They all promote the proposition that the government owns the lives of the people under its control. Life is not a basic human right to people with this mindset but only a privilege granted at the whim of whoever is "in charge." As long as a person is doing something the government deems useful, he may continue to live. When a person becomes a burden on the state, he must be eliminated.
Hitler selected several groups of people in the lands under his control who he deemed a burden to the state. He wanted them eliminated.
Therefore, he had Auschwitz built. Among the people eliminated were the handicapped, who took too much manpower to care for. He needed this manpower for other things, like wars of conquest.
Before they died, many of the handicapped served as useful guinea pigs for various kinds of experiment. How practical!
Stalin was also creative.He expanded the Gulag system so that many of the condemned could provide labor for the State before they died.Later, prominent dissidents were removed from society after being labeled as mentally ill in a psychiatric hospital. After all, anybody who criticized such a beneficent state must be crazy. With the proper mind-bending drugs, these people would soon lose the ability to dissent against anything.
If our judges can just get their way and implement the program the ACLU is propagating in the Terri Schiavo case, the United States will be able to benefit from programs to eliminate non-productive elements in the population at the stroke of a pen by any judge. People will keep their privilege to stay alive as long as no judge is convinced that they are no longer of value to the government. This is the same legal situation that prevailed in the countries that the United States formerly fought wars against.
Terri Schiavo is obviously dependent upon others to survive. Numerous people are willing to make the effort to keep her alive. However, her continued existence is an inconvenience to her husband, who has convinced a judge to help him. This is indeed a landmark case because it could well end in the State through its judges decreeing that it holds the power of life and death over all of its citizens.
Gone will be the need for due process prior to depriving citizens of life, liberty, or property. Imagine the savings to the government if every person with a handicap, disability, or genetic defect could be rounded up and denied food and water until they ceased to be a burden to others. Those troublesome people who complain about actions by the government could also be rounded up and sent to do useful labor in some remote location, such as northern Alaska. Later on, maybe members of certain races and religions could also be rounded and taken far away to learn the value of our new way of life in a forced labor camp.
I believe that there is a strong legal basis for making life a privilege granted at the whim of the government. In the absolute monarchies of Southeast Asia that existed two centuries ago, the prevailing political theory was that the king owned his subjects. The word for king in Laos, for example, literally means "life owner" because he owned the lives of his subjects. Under the "dictatorship of the proletariat," the Russian and Chinese governments were clearly privileged to quickly remove and eliminate any person who displeased any official. We clearly see the theory that the state owns its people in action in North Korea and Cuba, even today.
Apparently, many people in the United States believe that everything would run more smoothly if only those wise upholders of the law, our judges, could just make burdensome people permanently disappear. We would then all be safe from those disruptive jokes about lawyers and judges and no longer have to see any disruptive demonstrations.
The question is, do we really want to live in a totalitarian state and are we willing to do what it takes to limit the powers of civil servants and judges to those given them by our constitution and statutes?
Americans are in more trouble than they realize.
(We apologize that no biography nor email address for Mr. Heckman was provided with the above article. Only the website is given.
Email address for Victims of law is: email@example.com -Barbie)
J.A.I.L.- Judicial Accountability Initiative Law - href="../../State_Chapters/dc/DC_initiative.doc">www.jail4judges.org
Contribute to J.A.I.L. at P.O. Box 207, N. Hollywood, CA 91603
See our active flash, http://www.jail4judges.org/Flash.htm
JAIL is a unique addition to our form of gov't. heretofore unrealized.
JAIL is powerful! JAIL is dynamic! JAIL is America's ONLY hope!
JAIL is taking America like a wildfire! AddRemove@jail4judges.org
E-Group sign on at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jail4judges/join
Get involved at JAIL_SALE_USAfirstname.lastname@example.org
"..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless
minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." - Samuel Adams
"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is
striking at the root." -- Henry David Thoreau <><
Return To JNJ 2005
To JNJ Library Index for All Years