Barack Obama Would Take Back Vote Helping Terri Schiavo

LifeNews.com ^ | February 26, 2008 | Steven Ertelt

[SErtelt]

by Steven Ertelt LifeNews.com Editor February 26, 2008

Cleveland, OH (LifeNews.com) -- Senator Barack Obama debated his Democratic rival Hillary Clinton on Tuesday night and said his biggest mistake was voting to help save Terri Schiavo. Terri is the disabled Florida woman whose husband won the legal right to starve her to death.

[fetal heart beats by 21st day]

You watch my back, and I’ll watch yours! I’ve taken to just cutting and pasting since I never seem to get a reply.

I keep getting told by people, most of whom have been conned into thinking that states’ rights include the right to kill innocent people, that the gov’t had no business getting involved.

They have been schooled in faux federalism.

Then, of course, there are socialists who agree with them!

[Pinkbell]

Yes. Social liberalism has definitely infiltrated part of the conservative movement. Some believe it is conservative to be soically liberal.

[Swordfished]

What, still no answer? I didn’t get one either.

I believe there's a thread with over 2,000 replies where this issue has been argued ad nauseum.

[Swordfished]

Yes. Social liberalism has definitely infiltrated part of the conservative movement. Some believe it is conservative to be soically liberal.

It's a novel concept called freedom, check it out sometime.

[fetal heart beats by 21st day]

Arguing is not the same as exchanging factual information.

The duty of government is to defend innocent human life.

Obama claims there is some constitutional principle involved in looking the other way while innocent people, who are denied their constitutional rights to due process and equal protection, under American law, are starved to death via court order.

You asserted that you agree with Obama.

There is no such consitutional principle.

It is a deadly lie, and one which you may find yourself subjected to one day.

[jwalsh07]

and I applaud Obama on his new opinion Congress’s role in the Schiavo case, which is based on constitutional law.

What part of the Constitution would that be?

[dbehsman]

What, still no answer? I didn’t get one either.
I believe there's a thread with over 2,000 replies where this issue has been argued ad nauseum.

Yeah, that's just what I thought. A non-answer dodge. You deathbots got what you wanted to achieve. Enjoy your victory while it lasts.

[Vision]

lol

[Swordfished]

The duty of government is to defend innocent human life.

And they're doing a bang-up job of it aren't they?

[Swordfished]

Do you believe ‘defending innocent human life’ trumps the wishes of the spouse? What about the wishes of the human life in question? Is marriage a sacred contract or is it not?

[fetal heart beats by 21st day]

Innocent human life trumps all.

Liberty and “happiness,” however one defines it, does not and cannot exist without life.

A man who needs his wife dead in order to obtain “happiness” certainly does not consider marriage sacred.

Back to your statement about the Constitution, though, where is this right to kill innocent human beings in the US Constitution?

[fetal heart beats by 21st day]

Now we’re talking about a spouse’s wishes trumping his wife’s right to life. It’s got something to do with holy matrimony, it seems

[Republican Wildcat]

Do you believe ‘defending innocent human life’ trumps the wishes of the spouse? What about the wishes of the human life in question? Is marriage a sacred contract or is it not?

A nonsensical and dishonest argument as it applied to this case. This was spawned by a cult leader who believed he could communicate with the dead and their spirits. The "husband" in this case had been having a long term affair and having children with another woman. There's much more that could be said, but that's enough to demonstrate how ridiculous your comments are about this "sacred" contract from the "husband".

[Constitution Day]

I just want to weigh in and say I don’t give a rat’s ass.

That is all.

[Rb ver. 2.0]

Oh yeah? I bet you kill puppies and kittens for fun, steal pacifiers from babies and run down pigeons on your way to work you heartless bastid.

[Constitution Day]

I don’t have a real job, I close down orphanages just for giggles.

When I get tired of that, I push grannies into oncoming traffic.

[Swordfished]

Back to your statement about the Constitution, though, where is this right to kill innocent human beings in the US Constitution?

You frame the issue so that your position is unquestionable. It isn't so simple. This isn't Hitler's Germany or Stalin's Russia where innocent people are picked at will and murdered.

[dbehsman]

Back to your statement about the Constitution, though, where is this right to kill innocent human beings in the US Constitution?

You frame the issue so that your position is unquestionable. It isn't so simple. This isn't Hitler's Germany or Stalin's Russia where innocent people are picked at will and murdered.

YOU were the one who said originally in post #33

and I applaud Obama on his new opinion Congress’s role in the Schiavo case, which is based on constitutional law. (emphasis mine)

Both of us are asking you to back it up.

[dbehsman]

Come on guys, don’t be shy. If you have something to say, say it.

[Bronco_Buster_FweetHyagh]

He said that their “not gonna give up those profits easily”

When he said that, I heard victory bells for McCain. Seriously, his idea of energy reform is to steal money from Exxon?

The guys a communist.