Right now there is one big debate about Terry Schiavo, but it is the wrong debate.

The wrong debate is whether she should be allowed to die or not.  And whether that is indeed her wishes, or just an expedient way for her husband Michael to get a divorce.  And that debate has been beaten into the ground.

But the right debate is whether we have the right to inflict cruel and inhumane torture on one of our citizens whose only crime is her inability to speak for herself.

Starving Terry to death will ease many consciouses, but it is wrong.  We would not do that to your dogs and cats, and Terry is arguably at a higher cognitive level than dogs and cats.  Yet here we have a bunch of people on one side advocating doing exactly that. Why?  What travesty has she done to you that you so hate her as to cause her such pain and distress?

Or are you just being dishonest with yourself? Do you believe in death with Dignity?  Then put her to sleep.  It is quick and painless, and far more humane.

Oh, but does 'killing' her cause your conscious to cringe?  Are you yet lying to yourself?  You mean you cant kill her? Then shut up and get out of the debate.

The debate may be on death with dignity versus a meaningless life.  But the answers are either to put her to death, or to keep her alive.  The answer is not starving her to death. Period.

For those advocating death with dignity, be honest with yourself.  If you are going to argue it, then also demand she must be put to sleep.

Do not allow her a long, slow, painful death just because you are too chicken to do the right thing. That is beneath contempt and is not only immoral, but sick and deranged.  Like pulling the legs off of frogs for your own amusement.