Dory at Wittenberg Gate clued me into something that I need to clear up. She and I are both mentioned in the AP News story that is making the rounds. So far I have seen it on ABCNews, MSNBC, Foxnews and Yahoo News, and a couple of local news sites. The AP article references Dory and quotes her. However, it references me and quotes someone else. Here's what the AP story says about me:
On JollyBlogger, maintained by Maryland minister David Wayne, a correspondent who calls himself ``Public Theologian'' presents a strictly pragmatic view:
``The overwhelming evidence is that she is not going to get any better. This business about her communicating verbally is bunk _ her physicians have testified repeatedly that this is not the case. If she could do this there would be no question in the matter _ the courts would simply ask her what she wanted. Her husband has the right, as next of kin, to make her health care decisions for her. Tampering with this right by conservatives will undo centuries of legal precedent by taking that out of the hands of families ...''
Please be aware that the quote is from a commenter named "Public Theologian," not me. Those are not my words.
No one has e-mailed me personally, but Dory has gotten several e-mails expressing great disappointment that I would take such a view. She has written them back to point out that those are not my views. This may explain some of the hostile comments that have shown up on my blog today where people are expressing their disgust at so-called Christians who want to see Terri die. Maybe some folks think that these are my views when they aren't.
"Public Theologian's" comments are on my post Bloggers Best for Terri Schiavo, where I clearly say that neither Michael Schiavo, nor any government official or agency has the right to take Terri's life from her. Here are my words:
I will only say that the Christian view is that we always have a bias toward's life. Only God is sovereign, and only God has the right to say who lives and who dies. I do believe that God has given the state the power of the sword, which would include the right to take a life under certain extreme circumstances.
The extreme circumstances which would allow the government to take a life are in the case of war or some type of particularly heinous crime. I won't get into the capital punishment debate on this, except to point out that where capital punishment is allowed, it is only allowed in cases of the most heinous crime.
In this case, the government is intending to step in take the life of Terry Schiavo. So the question is "what crime or act of war has she committed to warrant taking her life?"
The sad fact of this case is that the only crime she has committed is the crime of inconveniencing her husband. This is truly a chilling development and I encourage us all to pray and do what we can to rally for Terry.
So, please don't confuse what you read in the AP story with my actual views. Or, should I say, don't confuse what you read in the news media with the truth ;-)