Posted on 03/28/2005 4:34:13 PM PST by gentlestrength
Liberal Abrams Report started a piece today saying, "Is it time to give parents rights over spouse rights? I say no way."
An older and weaker looking Rev. Robert Schuller sat there via distance camera, looking very somber. "I think you've asked the wrong question."
Abrams scoffed, and smileless Schuller answered, "We have to be intelligent. We don't make an arbitarary statements [like you just did] without qualifictions. We don't just say yes this way or no that way,[as you are doing]; that's not intelligent."
Abrams changed the subject, starting about Terri's husband, and Schuller interrupted: "I can't understand why Michael Schiavo still calls himself a 'husband.' He has been with another woman since 1996 with two children. I do not think he has the love."
Abrams got miffed. Schuller sternly and quickly replied to him, "I did not ask to be on your program. You called me." Abrahms glibly agreed, claiming Schuller's opinion was important and that is why he asked him on.
Schuller continued somberly, "There are three kinds of love: Self-centered, which says 'I love you because I want you.' There is Self-serving love which says 'I love you because I need you.' And then there is self-giving love which says 'I love you because you need me.' We hope that the laws [in our country] will allow people to be receptive to self-giving love. "You can't just say that 'because this is the spouse...' I think you asked the wrong question, framing it as parents over spouse."
Schuller was calmly heated. With seeming great sincerity and anger, Schuller said, "I have never written ANYTHING more important in ALL my books than THIS chapter [about the need for self-giving love]." [Emphasis his].
At which point you hear laughs from Abrams, who attackingly says, "What you're saying now might this fall under self- serving love," gleefully insisting that nothing Schuller was saying could be true, since Schuller wrote it in book and gets money for the book.
They showed a graphic of Schuller's book, "Don't Throw Away Tomorrow," with Schuller's calling out angrily in frustration saying that with what is happening in the Schiavo case, "We are throwing away our future!" and "This is exactly what is happening!"
Abrams quickly closed with "I love my parents, but would never want them to have the final say over my spouse."
back at ya........and I"m not a young lady....but I still wondered how you came to the conclusion about Abrams on a personal level.....nothing more, nothing less.....I think half these hosts act like idiots and that includes Sean Hannity or O'Reilly along with total jerks like Chrissy and Olbereyebrows......
Just think what his life would've been like had he taken care of his wife to a point where he had done all he could do and then divorced Terri giving her to her parents. Instead of giving Terri's parents $400,000 to take care of her, Michael gave all that money to Felos.
With the ratings at MSNBC,it seems that whatever criteria they used to pick hosts is in need of drastic reform.
yes.......his conviction is noble......but if you just judged him by his style.....it is at times worse than Chrissy Matthews asking inane questions along the lines of "do you still kill your wife".....just don't like many of the TV hosts because they almost are all that way...Rush or Medved are much calmer and reasoned
I never ever said it did......not in one single post....
Please explain your opinion.
I appears the difference between Terri Legal husband and her parents is Love, that is the reason the parents can connect with her and he can not.
Agreed. Hannity sometimes makes me think of the rabid redneck football guy in The Replacements:
Hackman: "Are you going to get me the ball?"
Guy: "Yes, I am going to go get you the ball."
Hackman: "Are you going to get me the ball?"
Guy: "Yes, I am going to go get you the ball."
Hackman: "Are you going to get me the ball?"
Guy: "Yes, I am going to go get you the ball."
Hackman: "OK."
Guy: "OK"
But, dontchaknow, sometimes it's that guy you need, cause he's got your back.
Glad to hear it. Why then do you believe emotion is involved in mercy?
Your assumption that I am madly planning some uprising is counter factual. However I am always open to new ideas.
well let's say someone is gonna kill you, neighbor, bank robber what have you......you beg for your life and they feel for you and spare you.........all emotion there....I would agree with you if you said "sometimes".....but sometimes mercy is emotional and not rational at all....IMO
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.