Sounds familiar.
"...Links...Rechts...Rechts...Links...Rechts..."
Dr. Josef Mengele
Posted on 03/21/2005 8:45:58 PM PST by Captain Peter Blood
I don't know how we came to be here, but somehow we did. I think it's part psychobabble, and part liberal speak, because for them, "feelings" are everything!.
I'm going to make a conscious effort to make sure I don't use these words wrongly again.
And otherwise, I don't care a whit about what O'Reilly either feels or thinks--LOL!
Good point. It's a case of osmosis.
Vibrator.
Two things shocked and revolted me about Bill's "Talking Points":
1) Bill made reference to "pulling the plug" on Terri. What an ignorant remark. She is NOT on life support!!! She is NOT on a ventilator. She is NOT on a heart-lung machine. This is about providing her with food and water. If a death row inmate or a terrorist were being deprived food and water, the ACLU and every liberal group in America would be screaming and up in arms. If she were a fur seal or an endangered species and basic nutrition was being deprived, the NY Times, the Washington Post, ABCNBCCBSCNN, and NPR would be editorializing (probably blaming Bush) against such mistreatment.
2) Bill referred to Michael Schiavo as "her husband." And this is where the legal system has gone so far astray. He is in an adulterous relationship that has produced 2 children. Any half-wit can see the blatant conflict of interest that exists here. Michael Schiavo should have been removed from the case years ago. Husband? No. Adulterer? Yes. And it could be argued bigamist. Unless Florida statute allows for this, his behavior should have resulted in a divorce decree.
Shame on Bill. I am normally a fan of his, but he came to the table on this one misinformed and looking ridiculous. I also find his Catholic-optional behavior sad. He complains about the secular drift of society and then he bends his knee at the philosophical altar of humanism.
"All this really tells me is that most people have not thought this out and if confronted with this kind of burden and decision may have a different feeling about it."
That's presumptuous. Maybe "most people" have thought about it and wouldn't want to see a loved one live a life that is so much less than life.
...John Gibson nailed it today with his Word editorial. ...
Gibson nails it dang near everyday. He's one of my favorites, along with Britt Hume.
I feel like BOR just kind of runs down the middle of the road a lot because he thinks that's what's made him. Back when he was butt kissin sKerry for an interview was the last straw for me, that and his premature dissin of the Swift Vets.
He right at least once a night though when he says bloviating is his job.
Huh? He paid the woman off AND had her agree not to discuss the issue. If this is not his admission of guilt then I don't know what is!
Glad I missed it. He makes me sick.
The Pomposity Factor, he's in full appeasement form... pandering to the lefties tonight...
"If he receives communnion, then he is guilty of sacrilege."
HUH???
mind explaining that for me???
There is a huge difference between heroic measures that prolong suffering and murdering a person by starving them to death. In this case, actions are being undertaken to kill Terri Schiavo. Otherwise, she would not die.
If you are baptized and confirmed in the Catholic Church and you later reject any teaching of the church, you commit a mortal sin. If you receive the Sacrament while in a state of mortal sin, you commit the sin of sacrilege, which is the misuse of sacred persons, places, or things.
That's right. I forgot about the payoff!
I was shocked that O'Reilly was so uninformed about what is happening with Terri. He was up on the Fla court things, but anything to do with the family, Terri and what the other doctors or people were saying, i.e., the affidavits of the nurses re Michael's treatment of Terri and Terri's friends contention that she and Terri were planning on leaving their husbands and renting a place together - they were both in bad, unhappy marriages. O'Reilly should have known these things.
Is the bill in Congress for the purpose of having the courts decide Terri's fate as opposed to letting her husband decide?
"There is a huge difference between heroic measures that prolong suffering and murdering a person by starving them to death."
Right. The poster was wondering how most people could be of the opinion that Terri should be killed. I'll submit that most people don't take her specific circumstances into consideration but instead, put themselves in that position (of either Michael or Terri) and claim they would choose death. I don't find that shocking.
"Lise is a member of the ACLU"
Well, that certainly pegs her.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.