Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Republicans show political hypocrisy with Schiavo intervention
LP News ^ | 04/06/2005 | LP

Posted on 04/08/2005 5:00:59 PM PDT by libertarianben

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 141-148 next last
To: danmar

It says what it says.


81 posted on 04/09/2005 6:38:15 AM PDT by TigersEye (Intellectuals only exist if you think they do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Fred Nerks
Hello all- 1st post.

Commenting of the reference to
"Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242
Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law"

Actually, I believe Terri's Federal remedy was under 42 USC 1983- and though I don't know the complete facts- it certainly wouldn't have required new emergency legislation to assert her right thereunder and get the matter into Federal Court.

However, since the whole idea was to save Terri, imho, the Republicans adopted the wrong political strategy to achieve that end. The emergency legislation turned into a political football, especially with the Martinez fiasco. (what was that about?)

Once again, if my facts are right, the Fla. Senate defeated a bill that could have saved Terri, by a vote where some 7 Republicans voted against.

It seems to me that the more plausible strategy would have been to get Mr. DeLay and Pres Bush on the phone to those dissenting Republicans, and explain to them the concept of "party unity" in no uncertain terms.

It is incredible to me that those votes could not have been flipped- and certainly, that would have been a more effective means to rescue Terri- as opposed ro letting the liberal national Media screw the Republicans one more, and open the door to these charges of hypocrisy.

82 posted on 04/09/2005 8:23:39 AM PDT by sirthomasthemore (I go to my execution as the King's humble servant, but God's first!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: B Knotts
I think it has, in recent years, become more of an anti-GOP party than a truly libertarian party.

You got that right. The LP always goes directly after the GOP, and never after the RATS.

I wonder just why is that.


83 posted on 04/09/2005 10:18:44 AM PDT by rdb3 (To the world, you're one person. To one person, you may be the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

libertarianben couldn't even come back to his own thread and defend his position.


84 posted on 04/09/2005 10:30:57 AM PDT by rdb3 (To the world, you're one person. To one person, you may be the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Comment #85 Removed by Moderator

To: danmar

You shouldn't be condescending and tell people you will keep it "light" for them, unless you are positive about your own position. It seems that it is the very lightness that you speak of that makes you so certain that you are correct - even though you are wrong.

There are plenty of examples of the federal government intervening or challenging state government actions that challenge a citizens' right to Constitutional protections.

It is a dynamic interplay that is not static. It's a moving scale sometimes...there may come a day when certain judicial changes will disallow what happened to Terri Schiavo.

You may think it is as simple as looking at "your" interpretation of the Constitution. But, it is much more complex than that.


86 posted on 04/09/2005 12:06:31 PM PDT by rbmillerjr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: B Knotts
I think it has, in recent years, become more of an anti-GOP party than a truly libertarian party.

I once used to consider myself a large-L libertarian (voted for Browne over Dole, and even retrospectively can't say I regret the decision; if the Republicans hadn't staked all their political capital on that loser, they could have gained strength in both branches of Congress and kept Clinton in check). Until recently, I've considered myself a small-l libertarian, perceiving that the libertarians were often right but the party was not effective at advancing its platform. But the Libertarian Party has gotten so bonkers that I see no reason to desire association with it in any way, shape, or form.

87 posted on 04/09/2005 1:18:05 PM PDT by supercat ("Though her life has been sold for corrupt men's gold, she refuses to give up the ghost.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: danmar
Let me put it light for you..."THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CAN NOT INTERFERE WITH THE STATE'S RIGHTS"...period!

The echoes of Gov. George C. Wallace are still going on today.


88 posted on 04/09/2005 1:21:44 PM PDT by rdb3 (To the world, you're one person. To one person, you may be the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: libertarianben

Mae Magouirk safe for now. See Tekgnosis for further details.

Tell the Media to report the REAL Schiavo polls!

http://capwiz.com/sicminc/issues/alert/?alertid=7351686&type=ME

http://www.emediawire.com/releases/2005/4/emw226586.htm

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/prweb/20050408/bs_prweb/prweb226586_3

My account, etc. of Terri Schindler's Funeral Mass:

http://tekgnosis.typepad.com


89 posted on 04/09/2005 4:18:43 PM PDT by pc93 (http://www.blogsforterri.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: libertarianben

The courts interfere in all kinds of states rights decisions. This was NOT a state's right decision but an unlawful decision made by a rogue judge.


90 posted on 04/09/2005 4:19:04 PM PDT by TAdams8591 (Evil succeeds when good men don't do enough!!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Treader
So, anyone pro-life has no understanding of end-of-life issues?

Who said this? Most of the people I know here who agree with me are pro-life.

What makes you the expert? What makes Greer an expert? Since you are a self anoited expert- perhaps you can tell us which law school Greer attended, is it the same one you have?

How silly.

...the fact is you cannot address what the law says when it comes a person's rights on end of life issues, and the right to say no to ANY medical treatments we want.

Unless of course you want to take that right away from the rest of us.

91 posted on 04/09/2005 8:59:31 PM PDT by Jorge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Freeper
Do you realize that individuals across the USA who are sentenced to death, for any number of reasons, have their arm swabbed with an alcohol pad prior to the insertion of the needle that delivers the final "juice of death." You know why they wipe the arm with the swab - - - because they don't want the patient to get an infection from the insertion of the needle.

And your point is?

What does this have to do with the Terri debate?

92 posted on 04/09/2005 9:01:51 PM PDT by Jorge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Jorge
Thank God people are allowed to make their own end of life decisions without interference from the Gov't.

Except, of course, when they AREN'T, such as that Grandma in Georgia who, but for the grace of the real God (not the phony one you praise) would have already died.

I note with great interest that people like you seem to have virtually no interest in safeguards with teeth, because you want your own or relatives' "death with dignity" to be easy and hassle free. Heaven forbid that something should have to be sworn!

93 posted on 04/09/2005 9:04:33 PM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (No wonder the Southern Baptist Church threw Greer out: Only one god per church! [Ann Coulter])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: TheDon

Since when does limited government = bending over for judicial tyrants?


94 posted on 04/09/2005 9:14:13 PM PDT by stands2reason (When in doubt, err on the side of life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Shethink13
"And how rational is it to use a feeding tube to pro-long the suffering of a person in a hopeless and helpless state of existance indefinitely?"

She was suffering? And you know this because....you can channel thoughts like George Felos and John Edwards?

Are you serious?

You can't talk. You can't move. You can't eat. You can't go to the bathroom. You can't wash yourself. Somebody has to wipe your butt daily. You can't cover yourself if you're cold. Of even ask somebody to do so.
And you just lay there day after day, month after month, year after year in this state with nothing but a feeding tube sustaining you.

And you tell me I need to "channel thoughts" to know that such an existance would be a state of suffering.

95 posted on 04/09/2005 9:15:34 PM PDT by Jorge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: k2blader
Let's see if we disagree on this: Was it wrong to kill Terri Shiavo?

Is it wrong to force people to be sustained in a vegetative existance by medical treatments against their will?

Do you or don't you agree with the US Supreme Court decision that every individual has the constitutional right to control his or her own medical treatment?

96 posted on 04/09/2005 9:20:59 PM PDT by Jorge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: libertarianben
Couldn't say it better.

Last I checked, this is a CONSERVATIVE website. What you posted is akin to a Democrat coming on this site and posting a column from the NY Times, touting it's merits.

97 posted on 04/09/2005 9:24:26 PM PDT by LisaMalia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jorge
Because they have confused end of life decisions with legal rights for the disabled.

The legal right of the disabled not to be killed becomes an "end-of-life" consideration, once you stop feeding them. Do you not see that? You are aware that Terri was not terminal?

98 posted on 04/09/2005 9:25:44 PM PDT by stands2reason (When in doubt, err on the side of life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Jorge

No, the original question was:

Was it wrong to kill Terri Shiavo?

You know she was killed, via forced dehydration and starvation?


99 posted on 04/09/2005 9:26:42 PM PDT by k2blader (Immorality bites.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: libertarianben

So Libertarians think it was okay to torture and kill Terri?


100 posted on 04/09/2005 9:28:42 PM PDT by Saundra Duffy (Rest in Peace, Theresa Marie SCHINDLER - IMPEACH JUDGE GREER!!!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 141-148 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson