Posted on 03/19/2005 11:41:00 AM PST by snowsislander
Lobbying congress? How about congress cut off federal funding to Florida until Gov. Bush reigns in the DCF?!?!
Amazing how the same people who are usually running around like ants in a panic to save the life of a convicted murderer facing execution are mute about this outrage, except to "Die, Terry! Die!"
I have people at candle light vigils for convicted murderers shed tears when they are informed the these animals are sent to Hell, yet not a one of them will cry for Terry Schiavo.
Indeed. A lot of them want her dead besides.
I think this is misleading and a dangerous idea to spread around. Plenty of people who are not "religious conservatives" don't want to see people murdered for no reason at all. You wouldn't have to believe in God to detest abortion and euthanasia. I must write to the Miami Herald immediately.
I have people at candle light vigils for convicted murderers shed tears when they are informed the these animals are sent to Hell, yet not a one of them will cry for Terry Schiavo.
Indeed it is.
The judge is even now willing to chance being in criminal contempt of Congress and to feloniously obstruct an investigation of the Congress rather than simply hold up this execution.
Sad to say, that even if she did suddenly sit up in bed, the world would still go on as it does. Atheists would not fall on their knees. Remember the story that Jesus told about the rich man and Lazarus who was in Abraham's bosom? Remember how he begged to come back from the dead so that he might warn his brothers because surely they would believe? It is found in Luke 16:19-31. This was the answer Jesus gave in the story to the dead man's request:
But Abraham said, `They have Moses and the Prophets; let them hear them.' 30 "But he said, `No, father Abraham, but if someone goes to them from the dead, they will repent!' 31 "But he said to him, `If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be persuaded even if someone rises from the dead.' "
So, sad to say, even if Terry miraculously by His Hand would regain her mental and/or physical abilities, as much as we want to think that this would make all bow at the name of the Lord, it simply won't happen. Jesus Himself said this is true. If not, then all the world would follow Him at the miraculous sign of His resurrection, much less all the other miracles He performed. But like you, I would also love to see this happen.
The post A.D. 33 world has Moses, the Prophets, and One who is Risen from the dead.
What is our excuse?
Hi there. Would you mind spelling out DCF, for acronym-challenged people like me? Thanks ...
I know those anti-death penalty people you're talking about. They're like that nun whose story was told in "Dead Man Walking," so much compassion for the perp and none for the victims.
What a shame that Congress was wasting time on steroids in baseball. They could have acted sooner and more effectively for Terri, if they had not been involved in that totally useless exercise.
How about sending in the Marines and quit fooling around!!!!!
Can't help being suspicious of why the "husband" refused to divorce her...
if Terri was black there would be 100,000 around that hospis, whites don't take care of there own (ò¿ó)
and that's sad!
Strange isn't it?
Any explanation in your opinion?
Has it always been this way?
(sigh)
Just to make things clear, gettingbored's comment in #17 is actually addressed to the author of #16, count_chichagof, and not to myself.
Well, where are the FReepers who were knocking Jeb last night for "doing nothing?"
The previous night, The House had passed a broad bill that would make sweeping changes in federal law, giving federal courts jurisdiction in any case involving incapacitated people who have not given advanced instructions about whether they should be offered sustenance.
But the Senate balked at the broader House bill, instead favoring a so-called ''private relief bill'' that would have applied exclusively to Schiavo and would have not have altered federal law in other cases.
In this case, I would have favored the Senate's approach on a one-case basis. I disagree with the House bill giving more power to the judiciary.
For the long term, (believe it or not) NYT's David Brooks last night spoke the best suggestion I've heard: Establish a law that favors "presumption towards life" when an incapacitated person (the patient) has not previously signed an advance directive (living will) choosing to NOT be placed on life support or a feeding tube, and the patient is not able to definitively indicate this choice.
Establishing such a law would be far preferable than placing the matter on a case by case basis at the discretion of the judiciary.
What say you, snowy?
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.