Terri Schiavo is set to start the slow, agonizing process of starving to death tomorrow. I find it to be a process where a husband gets to murder his wife, collect the money meant for her, and live with his new girlfriend without consequence by using the state as his instrument of death. But that's just me. The unvarnished facts are bad enough, without my interpretation.
The struggle is often cast as an extension over the fight over abortion; personally I don't see it that way. If Terri had left a living will, or made her intentions known that indeed she did not want to live this way, I would support her decision. But the only evidence that she didn't want to live this way is her husband's word. Forgive me if I find it hard to rely on given the large sum of money and the other woman involved.
It strikes me as odd that this is cast as an extension of the abortion debate, but I've noticed the same thing. It's amazing how many people don't care that she didn't leave a living will and that the man pushing to remove her food and water really wants to be married to someone else. My dad supports the removal of the feeding tube, but that's because that's what he would want in the same situation. However, in his case, everyone knows that's what he wants. In her case, only one person says that's what she would want. Very disturbing and unfair.