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

Skip to comments.

FL lawyer says Giuliani, Romney, McCain wrong on Schiavo case
OneNewsNow ^ | 5/28/07 | Jim Brown

Posted on 05/28/2007 9:33:12 AM PDT by wagglebee

The Christian attorney who fought to keep Terry Schiavo alive says the three leading GOP presidential candidates don't understand the important disability issues involved in the widely publicized 2005 case.

Hear This Report

During a recent Republican presidential debate in California, the candidates were asked whether Congress was right to intervene in the Terry Schiavo case by attempting to prevent the state of Florida from removing the disabled woman's feeding tube. The answers varied.

Mitt Romney, former governor of Massachusetts, said he thought it "was a mistake" for Congress to get involved and the matter should have been left at the state level. Senator John McCain said Congress "probably acted too hastily." And former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani called the case a "family dispute."

David Gibbs III of the Christian Law Association says the United States gives greater due process to convicted murderers than to innocent disabled people. The former attorney for Schiavo's parents argues that Congress did the right thing when it intervened to provide her those rights.

"Many of the candidates are following the political wind, if you will, instead of showing leadership and saying, 'You know what? That was good public policy back then. We need to stand up for the disabled. We need to stand up for the senior citizens,'" Gibbs says. "We need to have that compassion for vulnerable people as opposed to taking the mindset that those people that just don't matter," he notes.

It is disingenuous, the Christian attorney contends, for candidates to claim they are pro-life but not be willing to grant due process rights to the disabled. "If you're pro-life, you have to be pro-life at every step," he says.

"Please understand: our founding fathers understood that you don't have any liberty, our Constitution doesn't matter, if you don't protect the innocent life of the citizens," Gibbs explains. "That's why they talked about life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness -- your free speech, your freedom of religion, your right to own a gun or [receive] due process of law," he says. "If the government can kill you, you have no true liberty."

When Rudy Giuliani visited Florida he initially said he was in favor of assisting Terry Schiavo but later backpedaled from those comments, Gibbs points out. And in the recent GOP presidential debate, he says, only Kansas Senator Sam Brownback and Congressman Duncan Hunter of California got the issue right when they were asked about the Schiavo case.



TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2008election; davidgibbs; duncanhunter; gibbs; giulianitruthfile; johnmccain; mittromney; moralabsolutes; prolife; terridailies; terrischiavo
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 321-340341-360361-380 ... 1,741-1,742 next last
To: bjs1779

Yes. That’s why I only post to certain threads.


341 posted on 06/02/2007 7:32:42 PM PDT by retMD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 340 | View Replies]

To: retMD
Yes. That’s why I only post to certain threads.

Not really, you are telling us what we can't say anything other than what you ask because you have a perversion on medical facts.

342 posted on 06/02/2007 7:40:49 PM PDT by bjs1779
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 341 | View Replies]

To: CheyennePress

Nah! It was one of the very few times our Republican led Congress showed any real guts. If they had done so more often they wouldn’t be eating Democrat dust.


343 posted on 06/02/2007 7:42:44 PM PDT by Dionysius (Jingoism is no vice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: retMD
Yes. That’s why I only post to certain threads.

Oh btw, I think you forgot to answer my post. Did Michael have a history of violence or stalking?

344 posted on 06/02/2007 7:51:47 PM PDT by bjs1779
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 341 | View Replies]

To: bjs1779
I think you forgot to answer my post. Did Michael have a history of violence or stalking?

I have no idea. I read up on the medicine, not much else. If he did have a criminal history, the proper legal steps should be taken.

Not really, you are telling us what we can't say anything other than what you ask

On the contrary, you may say whatever you like, and don't need me to tell you that. I will chime in when I see medical misinformation. I will be silent when I have nothing to add or am not interested.

because you have a perversion on medical facts.

Once again I don't think I understand this phrase. Are you saying it's perverted to care if people distort the medical facts?

345 posted on 06/02/2007 8:00:12 PM PDT by retMD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 342 | View Replies]

To: retMD
If you have verified evidence of Michael Schiavo assaulting Terri Schiavo, give it to a prosecutor. If not, then it’s not medical evidence.

Once again, did you buddy Micheal Schiavo have a history of violence or stalking?

346 posted on 06/02/2007 8:28:57 PM PDT by bjs1779
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 334 | View Replies]

To: bjs1779

Once again, I have no idea. He’s not my buddy, I haven’t read up on his life, (or that of the Schindlers) and I’m not interested to do so. If he was violent toward someone, the police should take the proper steps.


347 posted on 06/02/2007 8:34:23 PM PDT by retMD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 346 | View Replies]

To: retMD
Once again, I have no idea.

I guess I believe ignorance. Sleep well.

348 posted on 06/02/2007 8:38:42 PM PDT by bjs1779
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 347 | View Replies]

To: bjs1779

Good night, and sleep well.


349 posted on 06/02/2007 9:20:56 PM PDT by retMD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 348 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Yeah, lets just have congress get involved in any old court case. That is not why they are here. They can pass some law after the fact but it is idiotic to have them involved in specific cases. Can’t you see where that would lead? Romney was “right-on” on this issue.


350 posted on 06/02/2007 9:31:51 PM PDT by TheLion (How about "Comprehensive Immigration Enforcement," for a change)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

Simply not true.


351 posted on 06/02/2007 9:32:46 PM PDT by TheLion (How about "Comprehensive Immigration Enforcement," for a change)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: TheLion

My post was explicitly factual.


352 posted on 06/02/2007 9:34:36 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (A wolf in sheep's clothing is much more dangerous than a wolf in drag.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 351 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

Homosexual Rights

Romney has always opposed same-sex marriage. He diligently lobbied Congress in favor of a Federal Marriage Amendment to the U.S. Constitution defining marriage to be between one man and one woman. Romney testified before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee on the Federal Marriage Amendment, and sent a letter to all 100 U.S. Senators on June 2, 2006 asking them to vote for the Amendment. Sen. John McCain and Rudy Giuliani opposed the FMA.

Governor Romney: “A lot of people get confused that gay marriage is about treating gay people the same as treating heterosexual people, and that’s not the issue involved here.”
“This is about the development and nurturing of children. Marriage is primarily an institution to help develop children, and children’s development, I believe, is greatly enhanced by access to a mom and a dad.”

“I think every child deserves a mom and a dad, and that’s why I’m so consistent and vehement in my view that we should have a federal amendment which defines marriage in that way.”
(ABC News This Week interview with Mitt Romney on Feb 18, 2007) (Mitt TV Clip)

Governor Romney: “I oppose discrimination against gay people. I am not anti-gay. I know there are some Republicans, or some people in the country who are looking for someone who is anti-gay and that’s not me.”
(Romney: I’m Not Intolerant of Gays, Associated Press, May 25, 2007)

When the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruling in the case of Goodridge v. Department of Public Health legalized same-sex marriage in Massachusetts, Gov. Romney identified and enforced a little-known 1913 state law that forbids nonresidents from marrying in Massachusetts if their marriage would not be recognized in their home state. This prevented gay couples living outside Massachusetts from flocking to MA to be married and then returning to their home states to demand the marriages be recognized, thus opening the door for nationwide same-sex marriage. Implementation of the 1913 law was contested in court by same-sex couples from outside MA, but the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled in March, 2006 to uphold the application of the law.
(Mass. high court says nonresident gays cannot marry in state, Boston Globe, March 30, 2006)

Gov. Romney provided active support for a citizen petition drive in 2005 that collected 170,000+ signatures for a state constitutional amendment protecting marriage. He rallied citizens to place pressure on the Legislature for failing, through repeated delays, to fulfill their constitutional obligation to vote on placing the marriage amendment on the ballot. Gov. Romney filed suit in the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) asking the court to clarify the legislators’ duty to vote on the issue of the amendment, or place the amendment on the ballot if the Legislature failed to act. The SJC declared that legislators had a constitutional duty to vote on the petition in a ruling handed down on Dec. 27, 2006. The suit was successful in pressuring the Legislature to vote on the issue of the amendment. A vote was taken on January 2, 2007 and the measure passed. Through Governor Romney’s considerable efforts and leadership, a state constitutional amendment defining marriage to be between one man and one woman has passed a critical hurdle to get it placed on the 2008 ballot where voters in Massachusetts will have the power to restore traditional marriage in their state.

Mitt Romney does not favor action at the national level to sanction civil unions and would leave it to the several states to define the permissible contractual relationships between two people. Romney would not seek to impose, at the national level, a prohibition on contractual relationships between two people.
(ABC News This Week interview with Mitt Romney on Feb 18, 2007)

Governor Romney strongly defended the right of Catholic Charities in Massachusetts to deny placing adoptive children in the homes of gay couples; saying it was unjust to require a religious agency to violate the tenets of its faith in order to satisfy a special-interest group. Romney filed “An Act Protecting Religious Freedom” in the Legislature, a bill to exempt Catholic Charities of Boston and other religious groups from the state anti-discrimination law.
(Romney files ‘religious freedom’ bill on church and gay adoption, Boston Globe, March 15, 2006)

Whereas Mitt Romney believes sexual orientation should not preclude joining the Boy Scouts, he supports the right of local Councils of the Boy Scouts of America to decide and enforce their policy regarding homosexuals in their organization and leadership. Romney served on the Boy Scouts of America’s National Executive Board from 1993 to 2002.

Governor Romney responded to a question about the Federal Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) and gays in the military during an NRO interview with Kathryn Jean Lopez in December, 2006:

Lopez: And what about the 1994 letter to the Log Cabin Republicans where you indicated you would support the Federal Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) and seemed open to changing the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy in the military? Are those your positions today?
Gov. Romney: “No. I don’t see the need for new or special legislation. My experience over the past several years as governor has convinced me that ENDA would be an overly broad law that would open a litigation floodgate and unfairly penalize employers at the hands of activist judges.”

“As for military policy and the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, I trust the counsel of those in uniform who have set these policies over a dozen years ago. I agree with President Bush’s decision to maintain this policy and I would do the same.”
(A Primary Factor, NRO, December 14, 2006)


353 posted on 06/02/2007 9:43:35 PM PDT by TheLion (How about "Comprehensive Immigration Enforcement," for a change)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 352 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
"Did you support federal court involvement in the 2000 election when Florida courts violated their own Constitution?"

That was the Court....not the congress!

354 posted on 06/02/2007 9:48:09 PM PDT by TheLion (How about "Comprehensive Immigration Enforcement," for a change)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: TheLion
I'll see your Romney campaign [lying] talking points, and raise you one set of facts about Mitt's homosexual agenda-loving governorship:

Homosexual "Rights"

Gov. Romney has a long history of promoting and furthering the homosexual agenda, and working closely with leading gay activists

Romney twice sought and received the endorsement of the homosexual Log Cabin Republican Club

Romney's campaign distributed pro-gay rights campaign literature during Boston's "Gay Pride" events

Romney supports homosexual "anti-discrimination" laws

Such laws are usually carried out at the expense of freedom of religion and speech. For example, they would allow lawsuits against a Christian book store owner for refusing to hire a homosexual activist applicant.

Romney advocates homosexual couples' adoption rights be recognized by the government

Romney supports homosexual domestic partnerships

Romney supported and promoted legalizing homosexual civil unions

Romney Opposes the Boy Scouts' Ban on Homosexual Scoutmasters

Romney barred Boy Scouts from public participation in 2002 Olympics

Homosexual activism in government

Romney appointed prominent homosexuals to key positions in his administration

Romney appointed prominent homosexual activists and Democrats as judges

Romney Rewards one of the State's Leading Anti-Marriage Attorneys by Making him a Judge

Romney announces he won't fill judicial vacancies before term ends

Romney's Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth used huge taxpayer funding to promote homosexuality in the public schools

Romney's Commission organized public gay "Youth Pride Day" parades and "transgender proms" which promote unhealthy and risky behavior

Romney issues a proclamation celebrating gay "Youth Pride Day"

Romney's Department of Education promotes the homosexual agenda

Romney's Department of Public Health (DPH) cooperates with the homosexual activist movement

Romney opposed federal legislation that would stop public schools from promoting homosexuality

Romney's Dept. of Social Services honors homosexual "married" couple as adoptive "Parents of the Year"

Homosexual "Marriage"

Romney refused to endorse the original 2002 Mass. constitutional amendment absolutely defining marriage as one man and one women

Romney unnecessarily (and unconstitutionally) implemented homosexual marriages in Massachusetts

Romney had marriage licenses changed to allow same-sex marriages

Romney administration ordered Justices of Peace to perform homosexual "marriages" when asked - or be fired!

Romney administration's training of Town Clerks (on how to issue same-sex marriage licenses) states that marriage statutes were not changed

Romney signs bill eliminating Sexual Transmitted Disease (STD) testing requirement for marriage

When requested of him, Romney personally issues special one-day certificates to allow otherwise unqualified people to perform homosexual "marriages"

Was Romney's public opposition to homosexual "marriage" based on expediency, not principle?

The Mitt Romney Deception
355 posted on 06/02/2007 9:52:03 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (A wolf in sheep's clothing is much more dangerous than a wolf in drag.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 353 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

That spam has already been refuted many times by people here on freerepublic. You should be banned for posting lies about a candidate. This does none of us any good. Would Allen do this himself?


356 posted on 06/02/2007 9:55:33 PM PDT by TheLion (How about "Comprehensive Immigration Enforcement," for a change)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 355 | View Replies]

To: TheLion

It’s only been “refuted” in the minds of those to whom [deceptive] Romney campaign talking points are gospel truth.


357 posted on 06/02/2007 10:04:06 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (A wolf in sheep's clothing is much more dangerous than a wolf in drag.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 356 | View Replies]

To: TheLion
"Mitt Romney is Giuliani. He's just lying about it." - Alan Keyes

"Romney seems to be Giuliani-lite, only slicker. No thanks." - Jim Robinson

358 posted on 06/02/2007 10:19:26 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (A wolf in sheep's clothing is much more dangerous than a wolf in drag.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 356 | View Replies]

To: T'wit; retMD
>> Look again at the scans.......... The point was, and is, that they were presented to deceive. As Polybius put it, "...to use those two CT images at different anatomical levels as comparison is total Bravo Sierra..." (post #103). And, "... when someone resorts to image trickery to make one point, your B.S. meter starts to go off about everything else they claim to be true" (post #134).

Boy, that was an old post but, here is the teaching point:

Which of these two head CT looks "worse"? You have been told by the media that "black on a head CT is not good".

Scroll down for answer:

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Answer: This is a trick question. Both scans are normal axial CT images of the same person at different axial levels.. The first scan is at the third ventricle anatomic level and the second scan is at the lateral ventricle anatomic level.

This cheap trick was the exact same trick used when "Schiavo's CT scan" was released to the media.....Not the entire scan...just two images at different anatomic levals which look drastically different in even a normal CT scan.

That is not to say that Schiavo was not really as bad off as they claimed but, if you are trying to bullsh*t the public about one thing, chances are you are trying to bulsh*t the public about a lot of other things.

359 posted on 06/04/2007 7:21:42 AM PDT by Polybius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: Polybius
That is not to say that Schiavo was not really as bad off as they claimed but, if you are trying to bullsh*t the public about one thing, chances are you are trying to bulsh*t the public about a lot of other things.

True on both counts. The Schiavo CT was bad, and advocates for both sides were trying to spin the facts to the public.

360 posted on 06/04/2007 7:44:32 AM PDT by retMD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 359 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 321-340341-360361-380 ... 1,741-1,742 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