Yeah, everybody who wanted to see Terri Schiavo safely in the custody of her parents is a Ward Churchill nutcase. You guys are really sweet.
No, not everybody who wanted to see Terri Schiavo safely in the custody of her parents is a Ward Chrchill nutcase. Funny, you didn't ask for examples, just made some very bad assumptions.
Those who supported murdering Terri say: "Well, I may or may not believe in starving Terri Schiavo to death, but if the government says it's OK, it's OK. Oh and by the way, those of you who disagree with the government-sanctioned murder of Terri are actually foes of limited government."
The first position is moral and internally consistent.
The second statement is amoral, in the purest sense of the term, and full of logical holes one could steer an aircraft carrier through. It is also fundamentally dishonest.
Not only that, I'm apparently a "Bible-beating" Buddhist.
It's okay. It's not like he's singling anyone out. (/sarcasm)
Is it me, or do you notice many on this forum like to "group-insult" so they won't get busted for calling names?
Oh yeah, really safe. Take a look at how Mr. Schindler harshly poked her in the head and berated her when she wouldn't follow his commands while the camera was rolling. Take a look at the testimony (albeit later recanted) of how they admitted they wouldn't respect her wishes, even if they became known. Look at how they would have had her limbs amputated, etc., all for their idea that she was their property and they couldn't let go.
To use your words: really sweet.