Main > Everything Else
Schiavo rumblings
mr.Curmudgeon:
--- Quote from: fredster on March 21, 2005, 04:19:50 pm ---What are the facts? How about this quote -
"Democrats and Republicans in Congress came together last night to give Terri Schiavo's parents another opportunity to save their daughter's life," Mr. Bush said, his first public comments since the latest legal and legislative wrangling. "This is a complex case with serious issues, but in extraordinary circumstances like this, it is wise to always err on the side of life."
--- End quote ---
OMG! Bi-partisan??...backpedaling already? Majority of Dems stayed away. Those that did voted, more than likely felt compelled to vote so they wouldn't be seen as obstructionist. I can't read their minds though. Either way, to call this CHARGE into Shiavo' life bi-partisan is to COMPLETELY ignore who has led the charge, who's been talking it up day in and day out, and who has claimed Terri's cause as their own. This is a Republican thing. The bill that Bush signed, in the middle of the night after flying BACK to the WH for the sideshow, passed congress with a voice vote - ONLY THREE Republican senators were present.
When the Republican's crass powergrabs fail (which is happening on this case), they always cling to the few democrats too spineless to stand against them, and whimper, "See, it's not just us...it was bi-partisan!!" At your age, fredster, I thought you'd be able to see through these kind of political ploys. I not saying Democrats haven't force issues before (although you've shown no examples, and I know of none myself, that equate to the same debase level as hoisting Shiavo in front of the world)
--- Quote ---That's a fact. It's a word for word quote.
--- End quote ---
Problem with you is that you think a quote from the Pres. determines what is factual. It's nothing more than *his* opinion.
--- Quote ---Maybe. Last ones were held unconstitutional. I guess the point is the Husband will come out and air his case finally.
--- End quote ---
Like pulling teeth...I can't get you to address the question. How do you feel about the Republicans desire to create a LAW that would allow Federal Courts to meddle in the personal affairs of the State??[/b]
--- Quote ---I say that if she said she didn't want this, then the plug should be pulled. If there is a question, then we can't undo it once it's done. A mother is crying for the life of her daughter, MrC. That's the issue.
--- End quote ---
Problem is, again, THAT'S NOT THE REAL ISSUE. We shouldn't be hearing about this in the news. It's their life. This is not Jerry Springer. We (the public) shouldn't be given the choice to side with one family member or another. I'm not her husband. We are not on the jury. The moment Bush signed that midnight bill, this was made a political issue about federal jurisdiction. It's not about whether Terri lives or dies, it's about WHO (Federal or State Supreme court) gets to determine whether Terri lives or dies.
--- Quote ---Today somebody else's plug was pulled. Tommorow there will be more.
--- End quote ---
If you support the Congressional Republicans on this, and they were to be successful, then you would have given them to power to tell you differently. Whether you like it or not. Whether you, or someone close to you wants to die or not.
mrC
Zero_Hour:
Has anyone considered that our congressmen are simply up to their old tricks (non party specific)?
Could this simply be legislation that is there for the "feel good" factor - not that this case really has anything to feel good about - Those who brought forth and voted for the legislation can say they fought the good fight, knowing that the legislation will be nullified as unconstitutional?
The Supreme Court (which last I checked is as high as it gets judicially) was asked to hear this case, and declined - citing a previous case:
CRUZAN, BY HER PARENTS AND CO-GUARDIANS v. DIRECTOR, MISSOURI DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
In sum, we conclude that a State may apply a clear and convincing evidence standard in proceedings where a guardian seeks to discontinue nutrition and hydration of a person diagnosed to be in a persistent vegetative state. - Chief Justice William Rehnquist
While I agree with the Court's analysis today, and therefore join in its opinion, I would have preferred that we announce, clearly and promptly, that the federal courts have no business in this field; that American law has always accorded the State the power to prevent, by force if necessary, suicide -- including suicide by refusing to take appropriate measures necessary to preserve one's life; that the point at which life becomes "worthless," and the point at which the means necessary to preserve it become "extraordinary" or "inappropriate," are neither set forth in the Constitution nor known to the nine Justices of this Court any better than they are known to nine people picked at random from the [state capital city] telephone directory; and hence, that even when it is demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence that a patient no longer wishes certain measures to be taken to preserve his or her life, it is up to the citizens [of the state] to decide, through their elected representatives, whether that wish will be honored. It is quite impossible (because the Constitution says nothing about the matter) that those citizens will decide upon a line less lawful than the one we would choose; and it is unlikely (because we know no more about "life and death" than they do) that they will decide upon a line less reasonable.... - Justice Anton Scalia in his concurring opinion
I agree that a protected liberty interest in refusing unwanted medical treatment may be inferred from our prior decisions, and that the refusal of artificially delivered food and water is encompassed within that liberty interest. I write separately to clarify why I believe this to be so.... - Justice Sandra Day O'Connor in her concurring opinion.
The actions of Congress yesterday told the federal court system to not only ignore the state of Florida, but also the Supreme Court of the US and a decision authored by the court.
Terri Schiavo's condition is heartwrenching, but this end-around by congress is just stomache turning.
Just a thought.
tommy:
Man you guys sure know how to depress a build your own arcade control forum , im sure theres a political debate somewhere your missing.
mr.Curmudgeon:
A thought I just had:
May God (or Federal Marshalls) protect the Judge that rules against the "Moral Majority" and it's "Culture of life" in this case...I'm sure he'll have deaths threats a-plenty from these unabashed hypocrites.
Hypocrits? Yes. "Terri Schiavo's care was paid for by a lawsuit - the kind that many in the RNC would like to cap to prevent "abuse;" and that if her parents win this and can no longer afford to pay their credit card bills they will find it a lot harder to declare bankruptcy; it's also important to not that many Americans still can't afford, you know, medical insurance."
mrC
mr.Curmudgeon:
--- Quote from: tommy on March 21, 2005, 07:22:55 pm ---Man you guys sure know how to depress a build your own arcade control forum , im sure theres a political debate somewhere your missing.
--- End quote ---
Does this cheer you up?