Schiavo debate: Ploy for evangelical vote in 06'?



Colorado Ryder said:
How is it torture if her parents agree to care for her?
We're not talking about the parents here, we're talking about Terry. Her husband has been going to see her for 15 f**king years smart guy. You think thats "no big deal" huh :confused: In a matter concerning married couples it is the spouse who has legal authority. Thats the way it has been & thats the way it shall remain UNLESS OF COURSE the big hearted Repub's can get that altered by using this issue as a political "football". " It is congressional activism, plain and simple; legislative overreaching and hubris taken to absurd extremes." "Let's be clear: The piece of legislation passed late last night, the so-called "Palm Sunday Compromise," has nothing whatever to do with the rule of law. The rule of law in this country holds that this is a federalist system—in which private domestic matters are litigated in state, not federal courts. The rule of law has long provided that such domestic decisions are generally made by competent spouses, as opposed to parents, elected officials, popular referendum, or the demands of Randall Terry. If you need any more instruction, I will return later tonight :D
http://slate.msn.com/id/2115124/
 
Colorado Ryder said:
Sorry but a state court decision does not equate to "states rights". A marriage is in sickness and in health..till death do us part. Does that include having a girlfriend and two kids?
Terry's best interest? Killing her? If it were you, but it isn't.
That is correct, it is referred to as "mercy killing". So what you are saying is that you would prefer to be left to stare at the cieling for say 20-40 yrs? Write it in your living will & name me as executor & I will have your wishes carried out freind. You do realize this fiat being chosen by so many is helping to place health care out of alot of peoples reach :confused: , incidentally, the blue collar, evangelical ones who the Repub's court for votes.
 
davidmc said:
We're not talking about the parents here, we're talking about Terry. Her husband has been going to see her for 15 f**king years smart guy. You think thats "no big deal" huh :confused: In a matter concerning married couples it is the spouse who has legal authority. Thats the way it has been & thats the way it shall remain UNLESS OF COURSE the big hearted Repub's can get that altered by using this issue as a political "football". " It is congressional activism, plain and simple; legislative overreaching and hubris taken to absurd extremes." "Let's be clear: The piece of legislation passed late last night, the so-called "Palm Sunday Compromise," has nothing whatever to do with the rule of law. The rule of law in this country holds that this is a federalist system—in which private domestic matters are litigated in state, not federal courts. The rule of law has long provided that such domestic decisions are generally made by competent spouses, as opposed to parents, elected officials, popular referendum, or the demands of Randall Terry. If you need any more instruction, I will return later tonight :D
http://slate.msn.com/id/2115124/
I am a smart guy. I didn't need you to tell me that. So he has been coming to see her for 15 years? Does he bring his girlfriend and 2 kids with him? What kind of "competent" spouse gets a girlfriend and has kids while still married? Read many of your post and they always seem to devolve into political posturing. Had Clinton signed this bill you'd probably be singing a different tune.
 
davidmc said:
That is correct, it is referred to as "mercy killing". So what you are saying is that you would prefer to be left to stare at the cieling for say 20-40 yrs? Write it in your living will & name me as executor & I will have your wishes carried out freind. You do realize this fiat being chosen by so many is helping to place health care out of alot of peoples reach :confused: , incidentally, the blue collar, evangelical ones who the Repub's court for votes.
Mercy killing? Remember that the next time you compare Bush to ******. And since you're a liberal, is abortion a mercy killing? Would you be the executor or the executioner?
 
Colorado Ryder said:
Mercy killing? Remember that the next time you compare Bush to ******. And since you're a liberal, is abortion a mercy killing? Would you be the executor or the executioner?

Again it comes back to abortion - the real reason for making this a political case. TSchiavo has about as much consciousness as a 10 week fetus so if the anti-abortionists DON'T protest then they're admitting at some level that abortion might not really be murder either.

And it allows politicians so inclined to pander to the pro-life contingent without actually raising the issue of abortion at all.

The only judicial matter in this case should be deciding who has the authority to make the call.
 
DiabloScott said:
Again it comes back to abortion - the real reason for making this a political case. TSchiavo has about as much consciousness as a 10 week fetus so if the anti-abortionists DON'T protest then they're admitting at some level that abortion might not really be murder either.

And it allows politicians so inclined to pander to the pro-life contingent without actually raising the issue of abortion at all.

The only judicial matter in this case should be deciding who has the authority to make the call.
No it really comes down to life. Abortionists favor this because if they don't then at some level they know all life is sacred. At least the pro-lifers are consistant.
 
Colorado Ryder said:
No it really comes down to life. Abortionists favor this because if they don't then at some level they know all life is sacred. At least the pro-lifers are consistant.
I'd respectfully disagree with my buddy Scott and argue that a 10-week old fetus, or even a 10-day old embryo, is a more significant life-force than Terri Schaivo's body represents.

The 10-week old, if I'm not mistaken, already has some development of the cerebral cortex, the basic mass which supports the mind (to get a bit esoteric). The 10-day old, like Schaivo's body, is without a cerebral cortex, but unlike the latter, is geared to develop one and thus become a thinking creature.

The body in that hospice has no cerebral cortex. It physically shriveled away shortly after it died 15 years ago. All that Schaivo's body posseses is a brain stem, which makes her neurologically on par with a starfish or earthworm, to be blunt. I feel tremendously for her family, but they've projected humanity onto a body which doesn't posses any.
 
Colorado Ryder said:
At least the pro-lifers are consistant.

LOL That was rich.

My point is that the only reason this case is POLITICAL, is because it's an abortion issue in disguise.
 
DiabloScott said:
LOL That was rich.

My point is that the only reason this case is POLITICAL, is because it's an abortion issue in disguise.
At least pro-lifers stood up and made themselves known. Most of the Dems just remained silent. All in the name of choice, Huh?
 
Colorado Ryder said:
At least pro-lifers stood up and made themselves known. Most of the Dems just remained silent. All in the name of choice, Huh?

I note that you don't disagree with my point, and I now bid you adieu.
 
Colorado Ryder said:
Isn't everything political?

I think Scott's point would be that the political motivation could eclipse proper logical or legal discourse in the matter.
 
lokstah said:
I think Scott's point would be that the political motivation could eclipse proper logical or legal discourse in the matter.
Actually, her point was that its a political ploy to advance a pro-life agenda. Her point in and of itself was political.
 
Colorado Ryder said:
Actually, her point was that its a political ploy to advance a pro-life agenda. Her point in and of itself was political.
Well, yes. That's Scott's point. What logically follows is that the pursuit of an agenda is bound to prevent the case from being approached with objectivity.
 
Colorado Ryder said:
No it really comes down to life. Abortionists favor this because if they don't then at some level they know all life is sacred. At least the pro-lifers are consistant.
You may have missed my previous post where i went on, ad nauseum, about the diff. between "life" & "existence". Terry has an "existence". This meddlesome action, instituted by the Republican Congress has no legal authority. They are, by proxy, diminishing/contravening the long standing legal ramifications of marriage. Now if someone is a catholic & feels obligated by papal edicts, they can abide by that. They also are against birth control. Many do not follow these antiquated edicts especially Protestants. Either way I don't think that Terry is being well served by the prolongation of her vegetative state ad infinitum. It's like being condemned to exist in a doctors waiting room. For all we know, one hour could seem like an eternity to her but she can't tell anyone her wishes & didn't have a living will. This situation is a very good reason for people to draw up a living will. Its free & the responsible thing to do.
 
Colorado Ryder said:
Does it make you sick that her husband manipulated her for his good? After her seizure/collapse he promised to take care of her for life. He would take her to their home to care for her. Then magically, when the lawsuit was resolved and he got the money he suddenly said she didn't want to live like this. She was kept alive by her husband to gain the lawsuit settlement.
Are you saying she should be kept in her current condition, as it were, to punish her husband. Doesn't sound like Terry's best interests are being served here :confused: Also, she was not being kept alive if you mean taking in nutrients. Remember-she isn't on a respirator or fibrillator. The proimordial brain stem handles those autonomic functions. She just can't do anything which requires thought (eating, for instance)
 
Colorado Ryder said:
Mercy killing? Remember that the next time you compare Bush to ******. And since you're a liberal, is abortion a mercy killing? Would you be the executor or the executioner?
I wouldn't compare Bush to ****** because ****** was intelligent & elected by the popular vote :D He also had the decency to take himself out. As far as abortion is concerned, I beleive the health of the mother comes first. What, pray tell, would you recommend say if a 14yr old indigent, single, mother wanted to abort. :confused: Because if you say have the child then you are endorsing a larger federal gov't w/ the associated tax revenue to be a father, so to speak, for the child. Why do I get the impression you would not be for tax increases :rolleyes: Lastly, a little good debate among freinds is good for raising solutions to problems so our little discussion here, brought about by the nazi's errr...I mean Republicans is a good thing. As long as they don't accidentally ruin the meaning/implications of marriage, although I could really care less especially since the Repubs want to tamper w/ the Constitution to disenfranchise tax paying & law abiding citizens (gay's). Why do the Republicans always want to tamper w/ the Constitution :confused:
 
I have read all of the posts, & for the most part I would have to agree with David. Though I think it is awful that they have to starve her to death...........
 
davidmc said:
I wouldn't compare Bush to ****** because ****** was intelligent & elected by the popular vote :D He also had the decency to take himself out. As far as abortion is concerned, I beleive the health of the mother comes first. What, pray tell, would you recommend say if a 14yr old indigent, single, mother wanted to abort. :confused: Because if you say have the child then you are endorsing a larger federal gov't w/ the associated tax revenue to be a father, so to speak, for the child. Why do I get the impression you would not be for tax increases :rolleyes: Lastly, a little good debate among freinds is good for raising solutions to problems so our little discussion here, brought about by the nazi's errr...I mean Republicans is a good thing. As long as they don't accidentally ruin the meaning/implications of marriage, although I could really care less especially since the Repubs want to tamper w/ the Constitution to disenfranchise tax paying & law abiding citizens (gay's). Why do the Republicans always want to tamper w/ the Constitution :confused:
You have more than enough posts that compare Bush to ******. When did ****** ever fly back to Berlin to save a incapacitated person from being murdered? Oh thats right you believe incapacitated people should be, oh what was that term you used, oh yes "mercy killing". Wouldn't want those people to become a drain on the health care system. Where have we heard that philosophy before......oh thats right....the Nazi party. Congratulations Mr. DavidMC, you have successfully equated yourself to the Nazis. Well done my man. Well done.
 
davidmc said:
George F. Will, ever heard of him :confused: "Mr. Conservative" himself said, that the gov't interferring in a marriage (defined as two individuals becoming one) will contravene 200 yrs of jurisprudence in regards to marriage. Do you disagree w/ him :confused: Also, Gov. Jeb Bush had a law enacted called "Terry's law & the courts found it UNCONSTITUTIONAL, therefore it was repealed. There is "life" & there is "existence". A plant "exists". They are not the same. If someone wants merely to "exist", that is they're perogative but, in this case, there is no hope of recovery & if it were me I would spare myself & my family from a prolongation of the situation. Sadly, she did not have a living will. You do make a good argument inre: divorce but, although it may allow the family to prolong terry's existence for their own reasons, do you think it is in Terry's best interest?
Peabody, this has nothing to do with gays marrying has nothing to do with Lib or Conservative it has everything to do with life. Terry’s husband is making the decisions and accusations about what a 26 year old girl was supposed to have said…I remember when I was 26 do you? How about you limerick? Did you think or vocalize what you wanted done if you were in a hospital at 26? I’ll make an assumption and say no, you were too busy partying and courting mrs. Limerickman and you Peabody, you were looking for mr. Wizard…

Fact: Mike denied Terry any kind of rehabilitation to help her situation.
Fact: He only stated that Terry mentioned that she did not want to be kept alive (7yrs) after the fact…when a law passed that “hearsay” could be used to pull the plug.
Fact: There are broken bones that have not been accounted for.
Fact: We do not know if she feels pain or not or what she is thinking
Fact: It is not pleasurable to die from dehydration contrary to some articles that are out there saying how “euphoric” the experience is..

Concerning what could be be done with terry I offer up this little ditti….
“Despite the contention of Terri Schiavo's estranged husband Michael and courts that have allowed him to starve her to death, a doctor nominated for the Nobel Prize says he believes medical therapies are still available that could help Terri party recover from her disabled state.
Dr. William Hammesfahr is an internationally recognized expert on cases of brain-injured patients. He has been identified in helping patients with chronic brain injuries from many causes actually leave long term disability, and return to work.
Terri Schiavo's injury, hypoxic encephalopathy, is a type of stroke that he treats every day with success.
"We, and others I know, have treated many patients worse than Terri and have seen them regain independence and dignity," Hammesfahr said.
"There are many approaches that would help Terri Schiavo," Dr. Hammesfahr explained. "I know, because I had the opportunity to personally examine her, her medical records, and her X-rays."
"It is time to help Terri, instead of just warehousing her," he added. "She would have benefited from treatment years ago, but it is not too late to start now."
This isn't the first time Hammesfahr has discussed Terri's plight.
Last year, he explained that, after examining Terri, he believed that she could eventually eat and drink on her own. He also said he believes Terri would be able to talk and have good use of one arm and one hand should be given proper rehabilitative treatment.
Hammesfahr also said he thought Terri wou