 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Vegetative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't...
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: CarolC Date: 22 Mar 05 - 01:47 PM But surely determining that very thing is part of the legal process? No. In this case, it is a part of the political process. It should have been left to the courts, but it was not. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 22 Mar 05 - 01:37 PM But surely determining that very thing is part of the legal process? If this same scenario was being played out in the kind of case you linked to, Carol, and the courts down in Florida were trying to make sure the life support was switched off on a child to save money, would it be such a black and white issue, and so inescapably right that people should respect that local court decision, and that "states rights" should prevail? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: GUEST,CarolC Date: 22 Mar 05 - 12:39 PM No, McGrath, that's the point... it is not a legal process. What is being done is very much in violation of our legal process. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 22 Mar 05 - 12:33 PM If true that's irrelevant. There is still a legal process under way, even if people may consider it to be improper or politically motivated. It is easy to imagine other life and death situations where very different battle lines might be drawn, for example where capital punishment was involved, and some kind of final appeal had not been completed, and an execution was scheduled in advance of a hearing. (In fact, as I understand it, that situation does occur from time to time.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: Uncle_DaveO Date: 22 Mar 05 - 11:42 AM McGrath of Harlow said, in part: You've got a legal system in the States where cases seem to go round in circles, and still end up sometimes with grotesquely wrong results. (So have lots ofther countries.)That's a problem you need to sort out all right. But cutting the Gordian knot by preempting thate legal system by ensuring that the person involved dies first is no way to solve that prblem. M of H, I think you're right--and you're wrong. Your first two sentences above are perfectly well founded. But the illegitimate cutting of the Gordian knot here (the "preempting") is being done on the other side. Congress's recent action is not only politically motivated but very bad legally. US Constitutional law calls for other states as well as the federal government to give full faith and credit to the actions of state courts (Florida in this case). The Supreme Court can under some circumstances have a last say after the state courts have spoken, but has declined to deal with the issues involved, in effect saying that the NINETEEEN Florida judges over FIFTEEN years have provided appropriate due process in the case. In my opinion the new legislation is not only ill-advised but unconstitutional. I think those who carried it through even knew this, but indulged in gamesmanship, for two purposes: One, hoping to get a put-back-the-tube order pending a hearing, even though the result of the hearing is likely to be a declaration for the husband and/or one of unconstitutionality of the new law; and two, for political polarization purposes. Wrong, Wrong, Wrong! Wrong in fact, wrong constitutionally, and wrong in motivation. Dave Oesterreich |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: CarolC Date: 22 Mar 05 - 11:23 AM I don't understand how you can say the legal system is being pre-empted, McGrath. It has been artificially prolonged way beyond what pretty much everyone else in the country would receive, by the politicians. The Schiavo case has been heard in court, many times already, all the way up to the highest court in the land, and all of the courts have agreed. The legislature has made special laws just for this one woman that do not apply to any of the rest of us... just to her case. Her case has received more time and attention from the courts and the legislature than any of the rest of us could ever hope to expect (and most of us would hope that we would not receive this attention if it were us). And most of the people in the US agree with the husband in this case anyway. Not only is the court system being perverted for the political gain of a few politicians, these very same politicians are undermining the authority of the courts by not complying with the courts' decisions. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 22 Mar 05 - 11:01 AM So where were the people on both sides who claim to care so much for human rights? And who in some cases surely do actually care. Isn't it time they recognised they have more in common with each other than with the people who manipulate and use their concern. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: GUEST Date: 22 Mar 05 - 10:47 AM The parents of the baby fought as long and hard as they could. But they were poor, and couldn't afford lawyers anymore than they could the medical care. Keep voting Republican, people. This is the world they are going to give you. Euthanasia for the poor, and "only the best" for those who can afford it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 22 Mar 05 - 10:43 AM Where were the people on either side when it came to defending the rights of that baby and those parents? I'm sure there are people on both sides over the Sciavo case who would be in agreement about a case like that other one - shouldn't they be searching each other out, and combining their efforts over the things they agree about. I agree, there seems an awful lot of hypocrisy around. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: ejsant Date: 22 Mar 05 - 08:32 AM Greetings McGrath…., You are absolutely correct in your admonishment of our system. This downright hypocrisy on the part of the supporters of this attempted imposition of some imagined "Right to Life" by not voicing loud concerns over this case in Texas is troubling indeed. Where was Tom Delay and his interfering philosophies in this case? Unfortunately, our politicians seem more interested in pandering to any interest group that in their mind will insure the continuation of their power then they do in truly debating and deciding what social policies the people of the United States of America (ironically they very people whose interests they were elected to promote) wish to see promoted. Yet they hold the later up as one of their great accomplishments in Iraq. The prize of power is so much more coveted (and seductive I suppose) than the actually serving of the constituents. Campaigns are waged based on market research formulated strategies rather than the discussion of issues. Unfortunately this approach has created campaigns that, rather than focus on the candidates successes and philosophies, focus solely, or so close to solely that it is indistinguishable from solely, on the criticism of the opposition. Again we, whom I believe are indeed the majority, who find this direction troubling need to speak up and speak up loudly. We need to do so in the Pubs, on the street, in our music, at the town meetings, and anywhere else we find an ear. We need to reassess this two party system that has garnered so much power over us. Peace, Ed |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: katlaughing Date: 22 Mar 05 - 06:52 AM Here's an excellent, imo, op/ed piece from a Ft. Wayne, Indiana paper online: Congress as doctor Congress' decision to intervene in the Terri Schiavo case marks a disturbing federal government intrusion into an individual's health care. And it has frightening implications for the separation of powers between the legislative and judicial branches. Clearly politicians determined to prevent Schiavo's husband from making the gut-wrenching decision to remove life-sustaining feeding tubes cared more about scoring political points than following the rule of law. Nineteen Florida judges have ruled that Michael Schiavo has the right to cease using machines to keep his wife alive in her vegetative state. The federal courts had already declined to hear the case, and the rightward leaning U.S. Supreme Court upheld that decision. Some Americans may be surprised to learn neither the House nor Senate bothered to gather a majority of its members' votes in passing this midnight legislation. The House approved the measure 203-58, with 174 members absent. Only three senators were present when the Senate used its unanimous consent rule to approve the legislation, though any one of the 100 U.S. senators could have forced a real vote. The implications are frightening. Unhappy with the decisions of state and federal courts, Congress passed a law sending the case to yet another court. What's to stop Congress from continuing to move any case from court to court until its members get the decision they want? While conservative groups hoping to keep Terri Schiavo alive challenge the motives of her husband, they ignore the irrefutable judgment of health-care experts. As explained in last year's Florida Supreme Court decision overruling a state law meant to overrule her husband's decision: "Over the span of this last decade, Theresa's brain has deteriorated because of the lack of oxygen it suffered at the time of the heart attack. By mid-1996, the CAT scans of her brain showed a severely abnormal structure. At this point, much of her cerebral cortex is simply gone and has been replaced by cerebral spinal fluid. Medicine cannot cure this condition. Unless an act of God, a true miracle, were to recreate her brain, Theresa will always remain in an unconscious, reflexive state, totally dependent upon others to feed her and care for her most private needs. She could remain in this state for many years." More important, the court ruled that to its best judgment, Terri Schiavo would not want to remain on life support. Yet members of Congress have declared they know more about Schiavo's wishes than her husband, more about her medical condition than the doctors who examined her. It is only natural for Schiavo's parents to hold out for that miracle, to pray for it every day. And decisions about ending life support are far from knee-jerk. Hospitals and hospices must follow strict requirements to ensure that the patient has no hope of recovery. As with many families, the choice is not unanimous. In this case, the health-care providers have agreed they have no substantive argument to keep Terri Schiavo on life support, and her guardian must make the final choice. This is a matter for Schiavo's guardian and health-care experts to decide. Congress should have stayed out of it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 22 Mar 05 - 06:28 AM You've got a legal system in the States where cases seem to go round in circles, and still end up sometimes with grotesquely wrong results. (So have lots ofther countries.)That's a problem you need to sort out all right. But cutting the Gordian knot by preempting thate legal system by ensuring that the person involved dies first is no way to solve that prblem. And that could have implications for other cases similar to the one Carol linked to. But why aren't the people who so are animated about the case involving Terri Schiavo, on both sides - the good people I mean, not the cynics and the opportunists - united in screaming to high heaven about the issues involved in cases like the one Carol linked to? Instead of demonising each other? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: Bobert Date: 21 Mar 05 - 10:14 PM You heard wrong, Martin.... Maybe you need to get yer hearin' aid checked out... And, BTW, I know I am speaking for my late wife, Judy, who was from Yunks-town, Ohio, and didn't hold back no punches. Yeah, if she had walked into the pudder room and read what you just said she'd have said. "My Bobert's more man than you could be if you lived to be a 1000 years old. He is da man!" Yeah, that's what she would have told you, Martin. That's exactly what she would have told you... And I never argued with her 'cause she was always right... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: Once Famous Date: 21 Mar 05 - 10:05 PM Ebbie, Ebbie, Ebbie. My what vaginal dryness does to the female brain. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: Ebbie Date: 21 Mar 05 - 09:59 PM Sorry. My apologies. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: Ebbie Date: 21 Mar 05 - 09:58 PM Did you hear that Marvin's wife left him? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: Once Famous Date: 21 Mar 05 - 09:53 PM bobert, I hear you're married to a man. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: CarolC Date: 21 Mar 05 - 08:41 PM McGrath, the case has alread been taken all the way to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court decided that the matter should be handled by the state courts, which had already heard the case several times. There is nothing premature about this case. On the other hand, this case... Baby born with fatal defect dies after removal from life support ...in which life support was removed by the hospital against the wishes of the mother in this case, because of a law in Texas that allows hospitals to remove life support in cases where the family can't pay the medical expenses, is something we should be upset about. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: Bobert Date: 21 Mar 05 - 08:33 PM No, McG, I wouldn't say keeping someone alive is a bad thing... But from all has come out from the medical community on this woman's condition, her brain is so damaged that there is 0% of any chance of recovery. She went way too long with oxygen and given the 15 years that her body has been in this state, there is good reason to think the spirit has longs moved on... If that is the case then keeping the body alive borders on tinkering around with stuff we usually leave up to God.... Yeah it's tough, especially when, and I hate to sound paranoid here, the right wing in this country has used every tear-jerkin, devisive issue it can to centralize power... I think that is what makes me angriest about this. Here these same folks will strap someone into an electric chair and literally make their heads catch on fire and explode and then say they are so friggin' pro-life... Meanwhile back at in Florida, the scene of the crime where George W. Bush's lawyers highjacked out democracy, a poor husband, who has gone the extra mile in his wife's behalf, is being told he doesn't matter??? This very sorry story should have never been able to find the light of day... Had it been my Judy in the two months perceeding her death in 1996 I would be serving time in the penitentury right about now for murder... I sho nuff would... Like I have said over and over... When you have gone thru hospice with someone you love, it changes yer perspective forever... I have seen the clips of her husband where he was taking this women's body out of the hospital to places trying to get her back... It isn't as if this guy just went out and said "Heck with her"... I was watchin' some film the other night where he had taken her someplace long after she sustained her brain damage and I was thinkin' that he has certainly been thru a lot... My Judy lived 17 months after her diagnosis. The first 12 months we had hope and then things turned poorly. The last 5 months were tough on the three of us: Judy, her mom and me. The last 2 months??? Oh, my God... Where were this woman's parents when the husband was taking her this pl;ace ot that place. No, we don't see them in the story... But we see this dedicated man. Even a year later he is still fighting to get his wife back... For folks who haven't been thru this a year is like a century... I am 100% sure that if this woman's spirit could communicate it would be saying, "Quit embarrassing me and let my body go." Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 21 Mar 05 - 08:04 PM Just because bad people with bad motives may support something doesn't mean that thing is a bad thing. Just because Hitler was a vegetarian doesn't mean that eating meat has to be a matter of principle for all decent people. As I'm understand it, what's involved here is a kind of final appeal process, and the issue is whether it is right to ensure that the lady is dead before that appeal process can be concluded. That sounds like jumping the gun to me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: Bobert Date: 21 Mar 05 - 06:31 PM And has anyone pointed out that the conservatives have been on and bandwagen for marriage (especially between a man and a woman) for some time now and here when "marriage" doesn't fit nicely into their little ploy to grasp yet more power by keeping their base charged up, it don't mean jack???? Again, yet another supreme case of hipocrisy... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: Bill D Date: 21 Mar 05 - 06:24 PM what, me? opinionated? naaawwwwwwwwwwww! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: Bill D Date: 21 Mar 05 - 06:23 PM (I listened to the House debate live last night....if you compare the compassionate, reasonable summary Steny Hoyer made to the slanted, sanctimonious little emotion-tugging bit of crap by Tom DeLay, you'd see what is passing for reason in this) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: Bill D Date: 21 Mar 05 - 06:12 PM The implications of all this go WAY beyond what happens to this poor woman. The conservatives are milking the situation to get leverage on other matters concerning other 'control of body' issues. They want to be able to 'shop' for sympathetic judges, rather than be subject to a plain law that might not favor them. ...So they got congress to put it in the judicial system! I don't doubt that many are sincere about their concern, but there MUST come a point at which 15 years of the doctors who are on the scene saying "there IS no hope" will prevail. They are trying to use 'opinions' of some who have looked at home videos to bolster the idea that "she 'seems' to be responsive"....*sigh*.... Some people just want certain facts to be true, so they gerrymander what the hear & see to MAKE it true. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: Susu's Hubby Date: 21 Mar 05 - 06:04 PM It was not directed at you Carol. Hubby |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: CarolC Date: 21 Mar 05 - 05:51 PM H, if your post is in any way a response to my last post, I have not suggested, or even inferred that there is a "grand conspiracy", to use your words, to take our rights away. But there is an undeniable trend in that direction. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: Susu's Hubby Date: 21 Mar 05 - 05:40 PM Although I do agree that W. and the congress is wrong on this case, I don't think that it's part of the "grand conspiracy" to eventually take away our rights. I just think that if the Gov't is trying to make the vehicle of marriage sacred (which I believe in)then it should apply to this case also if her husband has said that Terri has communicated her wishes to him before her condition presented itself. It doesn't matter what the husband has done in the fifteen years after the fact. The fact that he has still continued to be married to her and denied taking payoffs to let her continue to live proves to me that he truly cares about making Terri's last wish come true. As I have said before, the two shall become one..... Hubby |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: GUEST,Mrr Date: 21 Mar 05 - 04:11 PM Sorry, that should have read WHOSE rights. Not thinking today, too many numbers to crunch. That must be why I'm numb, ha ha! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: GUEST,Mrr Date: 21 Mar 05 - 04:11 PM Ah, yes, but who's rights? I worry for Mr. Schiavo's more than anybody else's... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: CarolC Date: 21 Mar 05 - 02:16 PM McGrath, I don't really have any personal emotional investment in whether or not Ms. Schiavo is allowed to die myself, although it looks to me like the people here in the Mudcat who seem to be the most emotionally invested in this issue on the side of the husband have all gone through similar experiences themselves. For me, I am concerned with the gradual stipping away of our rights that is and has been happening here in this country over the last few years. To the extent that this issue concerns me, it is because I do not want the government interfering in my right to make end of life decisions for myself. And this case surely does set many dangerous precedents for the stripping way of individual rights by the government. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: GUEST Date: 21 Mar 05 - 01:49 PM McGrath, the Republicans have triggered a constitutional crisis here in the US by doing this slap down of the state judiciary in Florida. Also, it is being approximated by many sources in the mainstream press that there are as many as 35,000 people in any given year in the US in a persistent vegetative state just like this woman. Many of their families will decide to have medical treatments withdrawn, including feeding and hydration tubes. This case matters profoundly, on many, many levels both medically and legally. This is a much bigger deal than you can apparently wrap your head around. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: Ebbie Date: 21 Mar 05 - 01:27 PM Oh what a slippery slope. Remember when the US Supreme Court pronounced Dubya President? They said the identical thing then that (Senate Majority Leader) Frist says in this case: ... "a unique bill" that "should not serve as a precedent for future legislation." Yeah, right. It sets a precedent that will be argued as needed, from now on. Two Sources (Emphases mine, throughout) About this bill, John Conyers, Jr writes: ..."But if this legislation was only about principle, why would the Majority party be distributing talking points in the other body declaring that "this is a great political issue" and that by passing this bill, "the pro-life base will be excited."? "If the president really cared about the issue of the removal of feeding tubes, why would he have signed a bill in Texas that allows hospitals to save money by removing feeding tubes over a family's objection?" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 21 Mar 05 - 12:50 PM There seems a kind of contradiction between saying "this woman died years ago, there's nothing there" on the one hand, and "this woman needs to be released from her suffering" on the other. It seems to me that it is possible to argue a case for euthanasia on either head - but not on both at the same time. "I don't think anyone who is fighting to allow this woman to die is using that as a political tool against Bush or anyone else" That may be true - but I'm not too sure that applies when it comes to the fighting by spectators, all the arguing about it by people who aren't directly involved. The idea of a quasi-proprietorial dispute between members of a family as to who has the right to decide for one of its members is a really strange one. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: GUEST,Mrr Date: 21 Mar 05 - 08:43 AM OK, song challenge! The hospital staff is worried And the family is hurried But since she's not there to cry Let her die, let her die, let her die The woman is there no longer She won't feel the pangs of honger She's already gone, bye bye Let her die, let her die, let her die... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: ejsant Date: 21 Mar 05 - 05:39 AM Greetings Martin, I can't speak for the "Liberals" all I can do is express my opinion and I do not want this woman to die but rather wish for the Federal Government not to; a). intervene in such a personal circumstance, b). intervene in a matter that the State has already adjudicated in accordance with their laws, and c). promote what is clearly a minority held social philosophy. The reality is that the vast majority of our federal legislators are lawyers and at the end of the day all this is going to do is require those of us that have already expressed our wishes formally to spend more money with….. you guessed it…… a lawyer to insure that our wishes are not circumvented by this new Federal Law and of course any subsequent amendments. Unfortunately, it seems that the legislative modus operandi here has been to create such a layered and convoluted system of laws so as to insure the intent is lost to the letter. Talk about job security! I see this as just another attempt on the part of Government to further reduce our personal freedoms. As was once the basis of the concept of "Free Speech" with-in our system; the Government does not give us the thoughts we have that culminate in speech therefore they cannot regulate such speech, the Government does not give us our life and therefore cannot regulate our decision as to how it may end, assuming that we ultimately have a say in how it ends anyway. Peace, Ed |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: GUEST Date: 21 Mar 05 - 04:51 AM I am for her parents and siblings having a say on the one side, and her husband having a say on the other side. They can thrash it out in the courts. Oh, wait, they did. For years. Everyone else on both sides of the issue should stay the hell away. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: Boab Date: 21 Mar 05 - 01:51 AM A perspicacious and insightful intervention as always, Martin..... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: Once Famous Date: 20 Mar 05 - 08:35 PM Amazing how liberals want this woman to die and are all for literally executing her and yet will whine about capital punishment for convicted murderers. What a true double standard. What true complete bullshit. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: Bobert Date: 20 Mar 05 - 08:07 PM No, it was Bush who had to buddy up with the parents and it was Bush (Karl Tove) who say this as yet another major leage distration... These folks love distartion as much a magician needs to distract while he trick you... This has nothing to do with this poor woman's body... The spirit has been gone for the last 15 years... Yeah, all these Right-to-Lifers, the womans parent's inclided, see this as a wonderfull opportunity to stick it to the progressives and they are, by golly, going to do it... That is the most sickening about this... This poor woman's body has just become yet another Willie Horton for Karl Rove... And on Palm Sunday??? What a collasal misunderstanding about life, death, forgiveness and Salvation. If Jesus were here in the flesh and observing this spectickle that the Repubs have pulled off today, He would puke... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: CarolC Date: 20 Mar 05 - 07:54 PM McGrath, I don't think anyone who is fighting to allow this woman to die is using that as a political tool against Bush or anyone else for that matter. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 20 Mar 05 - 07:09 PM But ain't using this sad case as a weapon against Bush and his mob just playing precisely the same game? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: Uncle_DaveO Date: 20 Mar 05 - 06:45 PM Brucie said: Why can't this lady be allowed to die in peace? Terri Schiavo is dead. Has been for years. What is lying in a hospital bed in Florida is merely a damaged chemical apparatus with a historical connection to what was Terri Schiavo. Dave Oesterreich |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: Greg F. Date: 20 Mar 05 - 06:35 PM And its workin' a treat, ain't it Bobert? Bush & The BuShites aren't entirely to blame for the situation- the collossal stupidity of the U.S. Population- or at least 50% of it- also factors into the equation. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: Bobert Date: 20 Mar 05 - 06:19 PM Well, I'm sure glad that Osoma didn't circle this date to pull off another event 'cause no one would notice thru over the clamor... Bush could care less about this woman... Heck, when he was governor of Texas, he oversaw the exewcution of more women than were executed in the other 49 states combined... All Bush want is yet another emotionaly charged devisive issue to keep the peons at each other throats so they won't noticed that Bush and Boss Hog are raping and pilliaging the working class and the poor... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: robomatic Date: 20 Mar 05 - 02:01 PM McG: I think it is oversimplifying things to find people to be as simple as that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: GUEST,McGrath of Harlow Date: 20 Mar 05 - 01:22 PM What I mean is, there's this appetite for building up these oversimplified pictures of the people "on thebother side" - if they're agin you on one thing they have to be agin you on all the others. Being anti-abortion has to mean being pro-war and pro-death and against welfare benefits and so forth; or from the other side, an equivalent package of heterogeous views. The idea being, I suppose, then you can relax because, since there is no point of contact, no shared values, there can be no real challenge involved. But life isn't as simple as that. Oh yes, there are always going to be people who fit snugly into any stereotype we assemble - but that is never going to be the whole picture. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 20 Mar 05 - 01:21 PM What I mean is, building up these oversimplified pictures of the people who might disgaree with you - if they're agin you on one thing they have to be agin you on all the others. Being anti-abortion has to mean being pro-war and pro-death and against welfare benefits and so forth; or from the other side, an equivalent package of heterogeous views. The idea being, I suppose, then you can relax because, since there is no point of contact, no shared values, there can be no real challenge involved. But life isn't as simple as that. Oh yes, there are always going to be people who fit snugly into any ewe assemble - but that is never going to be tey whole picture. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: Amos Date: 20 Mar 05 - 12:26 PM It's a private family matter, and making a political footbll out of it should be a criminal invasion of privacy. It's bad enopugh the family is so split they had to wrassle in court. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: GUEST Date: 20 Mar 05 - 09:30 AM Oops, sorry about the crap at the top of the post folks. Maybe a clone could take it out, and just leave the text excerpts? McGrath, there is a lot of shrillness in any political debate surrounding right to privacy issues like this. This isn't the first time the US has suffered it's way through really painful debates on whether or not the state has the right to make medical treatment decisions on behalf of individuals who aren't able to make or communicate their medical decisions to their care providers. This is a hot button issue for many of us who are going through, or already have gone through, the death of a family member that could possibly have been impacted by these federal shenanigans. The Right to Life movement, and their Republican politicians they helped elect, want to see their very narrow, ignorant, Christian fundamentalist religious beliefs regarding "the sanctity of all life" (weeeelll....except maybe the lives of the people we don't like, like death row inmates, the Iraqi and Afghan peoples, old ladies, etc etc), and wish to impose it upon all American citizens. They are attempting to use this case to overturn the last 20 years of legislation at the state level regarding end of life care, and deny the right for the dying (and their legal guardians) to choose to refuse and/or withdraw medical treatment. While the current bill being voted on in Congress this weekend somewhat limits the intervention to this single case, it also makes reference to others like it. The Senate refused to consider the House bill passed last week, that would have opened up the bill to any and all patients who are not able to make medical decisions for themselves. Whether people want to accept the fact or not that the Right to Life movement has catapulted this major legislation onto the federal front in the last few days, which will end up depriving all US citizens of the right for their legal guardians to make health care decisions on their behalf without state and federal intervention, it is happening nonetheless. It is being pushed through as a religious bill on behalf of the fascist Republican Christian fundamentalist constituency too--Tom DeLay absolutely gloated over the fact that the vote in the House would take place on Palm Sunday, and preached hate towards the husband from the press conference podium yesterday, invoking all sorts of Christian fundamentalist symbolism. In the wake of these bills having been proposed in numerous state legislatures around the country, after passage of this bill being proposed today, after the "Terri's Law" bill that Jeb Bush forced through the Florida legislature in 2003 (which was declared unconstitutional), and this extraordinary intervention by the federal legislative branch to overturn both state and federal judicial rulings in this case, I'd say people were idiots if they didn't think their right to medical privacy wasn't being invaded BIG TIME, and the right to make medical decisions on behalf of an incapacitated loved one for whom they are the legal guardian taken away from them by the Republican politicians so blatantly and cynically pandering to their Christian fundamentalist voter base. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Vegatative Woman Shuts Down US Gov't... From: GUEST Date: 20 Mar 05 - 09:09 AM And here are some excerpts from an article in today's LA Times:
By Peter Wallsten, Times Staff Writer |
