Schiavo case has exposed an emerging theocracy

It is difficult to watch the Republican machinations in the Terri Schiavo case without entertaining a fear that the leadership in Congress and the president of the United States are coming dangerously close to establishing an American theocracy.
Socially conservative Republicans are attempting to govern on issues of death with dignity, abortion, contraception, stem cell research and even international affairs from a viewpoint that is distinctly religious. Their philosophy increasingly reflects fundamentalist Christian and conservative Catholic philosophy.
This should be viewed with alarm, regardless of a citizen's religion or lack thereof -- even by fundamentalist Christians or conservative Catholics.
Delay's sign
Last weekend, before Congress was reassembled and President Bush interrupted a Texas vacation in unprecedented fashion, House Majority Leader Tom DeLay held a private meeting with a group of Christian conservatives. He told them that God brought them Terri Schiavo & quot;to help elevate the visibility of what is going on in America. & quot;
Private citizens are free to see God's hand wherever they please. But it is disconcerting when some of the most powerful men in Washington convert their religious philosophy into government action.
The irony is that DeLay apparently only half believes what he says. While he was arguing for the need to preserve the life of Terri Schiavo, whose nutrition was being paid for by Medicaid, he pushed a budget resolution through the House of Representatives that would cut funding for Medicaid by at least $15 billion.
Those kind of budget cuts endanger the quality of care for thousands of patients nearing the end of their lives, which raises legitimate questions about the depth of DeLay's commitment to what has become a catch phrase in the Schiavo case: "it is wise to err on the side of life."
Those were the words of President Bush last weekend.
But in 1999, when he was governor of Texas, he signed a law allowing hospitals and physicians to withhold life-sustaining care from patients with conditions deemed hopeless, even over relatives' protests. The Washington Post reported that last week, Texas Children's Hospital in Houston invoked the law to remove a 6-month-old boy from his breathing tube against his mother's wishes.
Terri Schiavo has what that boy didn't -- a well-organized chorus of supporters who are portraying her case as a right-to-life matter. Courts, doctors and ethicists who have visited and revisited the Schiavo case for more than seven years and have consistently found that she is in a persistent vegetative state from which she has virtually no hope of recovering, are disregarded, even demonized, by activist and politicians who share one thing -- a religious philosophy of when life begins and when it should be allowed to end.
A fine distinction
The United States was established by men who acknowledged the hand of a Creator and certain inalienable rights. But they also agreed that the government of the United States should not establish a state religion.
The Schiavo case has demonstrated that there are those, like DeLay and the president, who have no problem projecting narrow religious doctrine on government policy. They are not the least bit deterred by the fact that many genuinely religious people do not share their particular view of when life begins or ends.
They seem oblivious to the dangers of blurring the line between government policy and religious doctrine. We feel a need to warn that the dangers are real and they are present.