Peggy Noonan has a provocative piece today, in which she wonders why those who want Terri's tube pulled are so adamant and emotional about it. I think that she goes a little too Godwin at the end:

Once you "know" that--that human life is not so special after all--then everything is possible, and none of it is good. When a society comes to believe that human life is not inherently worth living, it is a slippery slope to the gas chamber. You wind up on a low road that twists past Columbine and leads toward Auschwitz. Today that road runs through Pinellas Park, Fla.

As I've noted before, I have a different definition of a "human life" than many. I think that a human life is always worth living, but there can be a point at which life has been so altered as to no longer be recognizably human. I don't know if Mrs. Schiavo has reached that point, but apparently many people implicitly believe that to be the case.

While I do think that there's something to what Peggy says, I also think that she's somewhat misdiagnosing the problem. Look at the usual suspects that she cites:

...why do those who argue for Mrs. Schiavo's death employ language and imagery that is so violent and aggressive? The chairman of the Democratic National Committee calls Republicans "brain dead." Michael Schiavo, the husband, calls House Majority Leader Tom DeLay "a slithering snake."

Everyone who has written in defense of Mrs. Schiavo's right to live has received e-mail blasts full of attacks that appear to have been dictated by the unstable and typed by the unhinged. On Democratic Underground they crowed about having "kicked the sh-- out of the fascists." On Tuesday James Carville's face was swept with a sneer so convulsive you could see his gums as he damned the Republicans trying to help Mrs. Schiavo. It would have seemed demonic if he weren't a buffoon.

Why are they so committed to this woman's death?

They seem to have fallen half in love with death.

I don't think that it's so much love of death, as blind, raging hatred of the Republicans and conservatives who they perceive to be in the vanguard of keeping her alive. Like many other issues, they have become polarized and emotionally against something simply because those they perceive to be the enemy are for it. If the president's Vision for Space Exploration ultimately fails, this will be one of the biggest reasons--because he, rather than the sainted John F. Kennedy (or even Bill Clinton) proposed it.

I don't see this as a partisan issue, though it's sadly become one. I've already said that I'm quite conflicted about this myself. The tragedy of this is that we simply don't have enough information to know what is the right thing to do. And that's the case for everyone involved, though they don't want to admit it.

Hi Rand, although I've never posted before, I enjoy visiting your site from time to time, the dialogue is generally very intelligent and cordial. I have been following this tragic case like someone mezmorized watching a horrific tradegy like the twin towers, wanting to escape it, but unable to look away. Why? My family went through a similar ordeal with my mother in 1980. She was bedridden, unable to speak, in and out of consciousness, and there was no hope of recovery, even though they could keep her 'alive' indefinitely. We all saw that Mom was essentially 'gone' and that keeping her alive would be for us, and not her. We came to the painfull decision to direct the physicians not to resuscitate her, nor administer procedures or medicine should she encounter distress. She passed within 2 weeks. I don't know the answer to this horrific delemna, but I do know in my heart that there comes a point when it is 'humane' and mercifull to let a loved on 'go.'

Mixed emotions on this one. Those who say that pulling her feeding tube and letting her starve to death would be tantamount to torture for whatever remains of her mind are absolutely right. What they seem to miss is the fact that a much less painful way of letting her go has effectively been made illegal.

If she were a dog, they would be able to give her an overdose of anesthetic (sp?) and let her drift off in a few painless minutes. However, she is human, so the only option that has been left to her husband is to starve her to death over some days or weeks. Either that, or leave her to languish, uselessly, for years, at somebody's great expense.

This is what happens when we leave our decisions to politicians. They are not competent to make such decisions. When will we learn?

Rand, I'm sure the Dems have played politics with this issue, but Noonan's column is beyond ridiculous. She's invoking Nazis and accusing people of being "half in love with death," and then she complains about the other side using "violent and aggressive" language? Give me a frickin' break. Talk about seeing the speck in your brother's eye and not noticing the mote in your own.