Terry Schiavo

[DLR'sCock]

Originally posted by Cathedral
And so it goes, the game of "abortion politics" has officially begun.
That's all this was, was abortion politics.

They have just over stepped their power and used a private family matter to do so, and it was unconstitutional at that.

I officially abandon the Republican Party as i type this, FUCK 'EM...

Now, lets hope this gets thrown out of court and Terri is allowed to be with God.

Fucking Pathetic, I'm out.....................

Like you never saw this coming? I saw this miles away....

[tomballin]

The U.S. Congress and the Florida Legislature have placed Judge Whittemore in a highly untenable position, that makes it extremely difficult for him to make a decision in support of Terri's cause, yet uphold the laws and his responsibilities as he is legally bound.

It would not surprise me if he turns the request down and in all honestly, I believe it would be the right decision, even though I don’t like it.

Damn that law Bush signed is a POS.


===========

U.S. Judge in Schiavo Case Withholds Ruling for Now (Update3)

March 21 -- A federal judge declined for now to order a feeding tube reinserted in Terri Schiavo, the Florida woman who suffered brain damage 15 years ago and has become the focus of a national political debate on the right to die.

U.S. District Judge James Whittemore, after hearing arguments for about two hours in Tampa, gave no indication of how soon he may act on a request by Schiavo's parents to order the tube inserted. The tubes were removed three days ago, and medical experts, who say Schiavo is in vegetative state, may be able to survive for about two weeks without nourishment or water.

``I will not tell you when, how or how long it will take'' to rule, Whittemore said.

Today's hearing was prompted by an extraordinary post- midnight session of Congress aimed at authorizing the federal courts to intercede. President George W. Bush signed the measure early today.

Whittemore ordered lawyers for Schiavo's parents to file legal briefs in support of their claim that the new law is constitutional. ``Get it done as soon as you can,'' he said.

Tubes hydrating and feeding Schiavo, 41, were removed on orders of a Florida state judge.

1999 President Bill Clinton Appointee Judge Whittemore, a former Florida state judge, was asked to order the reinsertion of the tubes while he reviews the case.

``If Mrs. Schiavo is dead, she will have no liberty and due process.'' her parents attorney stated.

$$$

[FORD]

[Warham]

Weak.

[Cathedral]

Originally posted by DLR'sCock
Like you never saw this coming? I saw this miles away....

Well, I could use the excuse that a sheep can't see any farther than the Shephard leading them, but i won't insult the party as a whole because it has flawed leadership, lol.

I'll tell you what i never saw coming though, and that is a day when i actually have more in common with a Democrat.

But only those Democrats that bothered to do their job and cast a NO vote for an unconstitutional bill centered around one human being that totally trampled the right's of a spouse's legal authority and a states legal court rulings.
The non-voters should be recalled for disenfranchising their constituants and not standing up for what they believe in or representing those who share their position.

The moment Congress did that it stopped being about Terri, and it started being about politics, abuse of power, a precedent that WILL be used in the future to proceed with an agenda i actually agree with, but cannot support the means in which it was accomplished.

I do however have confidence that the Federal Court will rule the bill uconstitutional and uphold the states decision.
But even then, it won't erase the mindset of intrusion that the party I have supported since i was of legal age decided to stick their nose into and throw out the legal guardianship that i happen to have myself.

Here's what i predict: I predict that after this all blows over and the outcome is whatever it is decided to be, Jeb Bush will be placed upon the shoulders of the Republican Party as some kind of Hero that the Christian Right will flock to.
I believe this ploy will ultimately fail because the Republicans underestimated the people that cast votes for them in the first place.

What i mean by that is, I don't know anyone personally in my circle of Conservative Voting Friends that isn't outraged by the steamrolling that happened last night.
And in my humbled opinion, next years elections will see a shift in the trend, and the Republicans will, or at least they should by all Constitutional Accounts, lose their jobs for, as a direct result of the "Terri's Law" power grab.

And for those who hate Michael Schiavo they should be glad to know that Terri's friends who are claiming that Terri stated her wishes against a life like this are NOT in Michael's corner for Michaels sake.
They have been very vocal about how he treated her which is where i was hoping to be justified in my own feelings about it.
My conflict came from the fact that Terri didn't choose Michael as her guardian because she was not able to do so.
In my own personal situation, MY WIFE VERBALLY chose me to be hers.

Bottom line her is simple, if it was Terri's wish NOT to continue living as a vegetable, and there is evidence to that effect BEYOND what her husband states, then I am all for her wishes being granted.

And if there is any good that comes from this being steamrolled into a Federal court, it will be that the records have been opened, and he will get what is coming to him for any wrong doing on his part.

Justice For All, isn't that what our Constitution states is EVERYONE'S right?
But it will NOT excuse the tactics the Republican Party used to bring about that justice. Their motives were based on something completely different than that, and I will not credit them with that political accomplishment.
I will hold them accountable with MY VOTE by voting them out of office.

End of Story....................

[Warham]

I don't see the Republicans losing anything, since the Democrats have nothing to gain out of it. Notice that the big time libs like Kerry, Clinton, and Kennedy hardly made a peep? They have nothing to gain from this either way it turns out.

If anything, the Republicans will continue to garner the votes from those that will remember this story six months from now, and that's the red-state conservative Christian voters who are pro-life.

Even the Vatican has chimed in on the side of her parents, and you know how many Catholics hold the Vatican like it's the throne of God on Earth...

[LoungeMachine]

Law Bush signed as Texas governor prompts cries of hypocrisy

BY WILLIAM DOUGLAS

Knight Ridder Newspapers


WASHINGTON - (KRT) - The federal law that President Bush signed early Monday in an effort to prolong Terri Schiavo's life appears to contradict a right-to-die law that he signed as Texas governor, prompting cries of hypocrisy from congressional Democrats and some bioethicists.




NOW READ THIS PART

In 1999, then-Gov. Bush signed the Advance Directives Act, which lets a patient's surrogate make life-ending decisions on his or her behalf. The measure also allows Texas hospitals to disconnect patients from life-sustaining systems if a physician, in consultation with a hospital bioethics committee, concludes that the patient's condition is hopeless.




Bioethicists familiar with the Texas law said Monday that if the Schiavo case had occurred in Texas, her husband would be the legal decision-maker and, because he and her doctors agreed that she had no hope of recovery, her feeding tube would be disconnected.

"The Texas law signed in 1999 allowed next of kin to decide what the patient wanted, if competent," said John Robertson, a University of Texas bioethicist.

While Congress and the White House were considering legislation recently in the Schiavo case, Bush's Texas law faced its first high-profile test. With the permission of a judge, a Houston hospital disconnected a critically ill infant from his breathing tube last week against his mother's wishes after doctors determined that continuing life support would be futile.

"The mother down in Texas must be reading the Schiavo case and scratching her head," said Dr. Howard Brody, the director of Michigan State University's Center for Ethics and Humanities in the Life Sciences. "This does appear to be a contradiction."

Brody said that, in taking up the Schiavo case, Bush and Congress had shattered a body of bioethics law and practice.

"This is crazy. It's political grandstanding," he said.

Bush's apparent shift on right-to-die decisions wasn't lost on Democrats. During heated debate on the Schiavo case, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., accused Bush of hypocrisy.

"It appears that President Bush felt, as governor, that there was a point which, when doctors felt there was no further hope for the patient, that it is appropriate for an end-of-life decision to be made, even over the objection of family members," Wasserman Schultz said. "There is an obvious conflict here between the president's feelings on this matter now as compared to when he was governor of Texas."

White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan termed Wasserman Schultz's remarks "uninformed accusations" and denied that there was any conflict in Bush's positions on the two laws.

"The legislation he signed (early Monday) is consistent with his views," McClellan said. "The (1999) legislation he signed into law actually provided new protections for patients ... prior to the passage of the '99 legislation that he signed, there were no protections."

Wasserman Schultz stuck by her remarks when told of McClellan's comments.

"It's a fact in black and white," she said. "It's a direct conflict on the position he has in the Schiavo case."

Tom Mayo, a Southern Methodist University Law School associate professor who helped draft the Texas law, said he saw no inconsistency in Bush's stands.

"It's not really a conflict, because the (Texas) law addresses different types of disputes, meaning the dispute between decision-maker and physician," he said. "The Schiavo case is a disagreement among family members."

Bush himself framed the Schiavo decision this way Monday.

"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," the president said during a Social Security event in Tucson, Ariz. He didn't mention the 1999 Texas law.

---

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by Warham
I don't see the Republicans losing anything, since the Democrats have nothing to gain out of it.

You are a disgusting human being

[Warham]

Originally posted by LoungeMachine
You are a disgusting human being

Knock it off, Lounge.

Like liberals have never used an issue for political gain?

Your party is the master of that.

Every issue that comes before Congress has a political side to it.

[Cathedral]

Originally posted by Warham
I don't see the Republicans losing anything, since the Democrats have nothing to gain out of it. Notice that the big time libs like Kerry, Clinton, and Kennedy hardly made a peep? They have nothing to gain from this either way it turns out.

If anything, the Republicans will continue to garner the votes from those that will remember this story six months from now, and that's the red-state conservative Christian voters who are pro-life.

Even the Vatican has chimed in on the side of her parents, and you know how many Catholics hold the Vatican like it's the throne of God on Earth...

You missed my point completely. It has nothing to do with the Democrats gaining or losing, it will be about the Republicans being held accountable for Unconstitutional Behavior.
People probably won't remember this story, but they will remember the power grab that went down, as i am very sure I will.

But the Democrats are in a unique position they haven't seen in years. That is that if they are smart and use this issue wisely, it CAN help them gain seats and balance out the power more than it is right now, maybe even in their favor.

But there is a Conservative attitude still in the back of my mind that they will blow it.

As for me, the sky is a lovely shade of GREEN, lmmfao...........

[Warham]

It's not unconstitutional in my view.

[Cathedral]

Ok, I respect that view, i just don't share it.
To me, it is about the guardianship that Tom DeLay trampled so carelessly. His words felt like a spear to my chest.
It could be your life they legislate next. all it takes is an accident that silences your view.

Dude, I just can't trust people like that.

[Warham]

Listen,

I agree that it's a tough issue, and that the feds should NOT get involved with these issues, leaving it to the states, but this case is special for various reasons.

The one thing that bothers me the most is she had no living will, her husband seems like a scumbag at times, and the fact that I don't agree with starving her to death when death-row child molesters and murderers in Florida get a more humane death than she does.

Like some, I agree that without a living will, we should err on the side of life.

[Cathedral]

Ahhh, I see where we differ.
I don't support the Death Penalty because i think killers should spend their lives in prison where they can suffer the loss of freedom and think about why they are where they are everyday.
And also because there is an inside chance they could suffer a not so humane death like Jeffery Dahmer did.

But it is clear to me that Terri has friends that are NOT supporters of her husband that state she would prefer death to her current condition.
I don't give a rats ass aboot Michael Schiavo and i hope he gets his if what everyone has said cn be proven.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Warham
I don't see the Republicans losing anything, since the Democrats have nothing to gain out of it. Notice that the big time libs like Kerry, Clinton, and Kennedy hardly made a peep? They have nothing to gain from this either way it turns out.

If anything, the Republicans will continue to garner the votes from those that will remember this story six months from now, and that's the red-state conservative Christian voters who are pro-life.

Even the Vatican has chimed in on the side of her parents, and you know how many Catholics hold the Vatican like it's the throne of God on Earth...

Yup. stupid Christians will still give them their votes based on superficial, phoney notions of morality and symbolism. But as George Carlin once said, "symbolism is for the symbol minded!" "Real Christians" like Tom DeLay will continue to stay in power based on lip service and corrupt pandering to multi-national corporations. Continue to vote against your own economic interests BUSHEEP.

Nice bigoted, stereotype about those "papist" Catholics BTW. I've never met anyone that believes that shit literally, only Evangelicals believe in such superstitious horseshit.