I have trouble getting exercised over the Schiavo case. Terri Schiavo is not being murdered by the state or anyone else, nor is the husband a heartless monster for refusing to keep her alive and trying to respect her wishes concerning final things. So far as we know based on the current state of neurological science, the person called "Terri Schiavo" died approximately 15 years ago. There is no there there anymore. What remains is, simply, the rest of her body, incapable of sustaining itself, which is now the subject of an intense, horrifically disgusting and cynical political game.
This case has nothing in common with the abortion/right to life dispute. The developing child, whether 2 merged cells old or 100 million, has everything needed to have consciousness and to be a "person." "Terri Schiavo" does not and will not. Should medical science someday be able to generate replacement brain cells, the regenerated brain will still not be "Terri Schiavo" because the memories and experiences that made her "Terri" ceased to exist when the brain cells that contained them died. She would not suddenly wake up, be able to speak or even recognize that her parents were her parents and her husband was her husband. It would be as if science had created an adult clone with a completely new and unformed brain. "Terri" is not going to be resurrected by man.
Yes, this means that I do not believe there is such a thing as a unique, immortal and non-physical "soul" that is "Terri Schiavo." But if I did I would wonder exactly how I was serving it by keeping - or more accurately, by compelling others to keep - her body, without her brain, alive. Is this serving "Terri," or is this using "Terri" to achieve some other goal?
