Gov. Bush calls special session over Terri Schiavo

To: Don'tMessWithTexas

So you're giving up on the "Pro-Life Movement" because you disagree with a laughter to a post I made? If you have a problem with it, please take it up with me or just ignore comments that I make in the future. Simple. I am prolife and I do not wish Michael Schiavo dead because that is counter to what I believe in, and that would put me on the same plane as he is. I am not God and I don't profess to be.

But, given that if you READ the post this excerpt came from, you would understand that the words were in relation to MS's justification of his actions toward his wife as "this is what she'd want anyway" when her responses to information leaking to her that they were pulling the tube were clearly to the contrary. So to him, "This is what she would want" is a rather poor justification for starving his wife and using her money to supply himself and his mistress with whatever they seem appropriate (including but not limited to a Mercedes) and to let his current wife die so that he can marry his mistress, with whom he has children. This is often the justification that rapists give to mollify their own feelings about what they've done. If they can minimize the effect of the trauma they've caused by insisting the person would want it that way, they can sleep better at night.

So, if he were in prison and was witness to something horrible over which he had no say(whether he was a victim of something or if he has SEEN something horrible happening) then he may see that a justification such as, "She asked for it" is the justification of a person who knows darn well they'll have to answer for their actions in this world or next.

The comment about ending up in prison with very slippery soap is regarding his involvement in possibly illegal and definitely immoral acts (including attempted murder, plus God only knows what else this jagoff has done). The soap is in reference to the "don't drop the soap" comments made to people who are going to prison. From what I hear, going to prison and the activities within are often enough to make people wish they were dead. But if he were to experience something in there that was not of a happy incidence, he can't defend himself by saying "I didn't want it" because, as always, it's one person against another.

I believe I have now clarified any misunderstandings about what I have said. If you don't like it, you don't have to. I'm not here to make you happy as you are not here to make me happy. If you do not like something I say, you have the right to respond or ignore, as do I.

1,981 posted on 10/21/2003 5:03:11 PM PDT by Rebelgrrl

Well, O'BillRiled is going to cover this also and apparently going to ask viewers of their views. So you make want to flip the tube back on. ;o)

1,982 posted on 10/21/2003 5:03:45 PM PDT by Ladysmith (Low-carbing works!! (223.0 (-37.6)))

This is appalling how long it took for the media to report on this!

But I'm gald they finaly are..

1,983 posted on 10/21/2003 5:04:36 PM PDT by OXENinFLA

Terri only needs to have either her newly appointed Guardian Ad Litem perform this function

How does her RCC affiliation impinge on this? I don't think they will allow to annul even on the basis of hubby's unfaithfulness. Look for Michael Schiavo to whine that this would impinge on Terri's religious rights.

1,984 posted on 10/21/2003 5:04:47 PM PDT by HiTech RedNeck

MSNBC: Michael Schiavo is seeking a hearing in a half-hour for injuction...

1,985 posted on 10/21/2003 5:04:59 PM PDT by Gelato

A hearing with whom? Greer?

1,986 posted on 10/21/2003 5:07:14 PM PDT by johnb838 (sarcasm tags are for wimps)

I too have been wondering about a divorce. Supposedly her friends have said she was talking about divorcing him before her mysterious collaspe. Of course she would need a guardian first but IF her family wanted to pursue that avenue, could they? Hubby has already broken the marriage vows and could have misdemeanor charges brought for shacking up with another but is there something else standing in the way of a divorce?

1,987 posted on 10/21/2003 5:07:44 PM PDT by mtbopfuyn

Like the eveready bunny from hell!

1,988 posted on 10/21/2003 5:08:08 PM PDT by HiTech RedNeck

A hearing with whom? Greer?

I'm not sure.

1,989 posted on 10/21/2003 5:08:21 PM PDT by Gelato

These steps need to be started, PRONTO.

The family does not need to wait to do this.
I would only hope they are represented by someone who is an attack dog lawyer!!!
I would like to suggest that anyone that believes this is important,
needs to let the family know to start proceedings!!!

This is not the time to sit back and 'let it be'.

Continue to pray, BELIEVING, and work like crazy!

1,990 posted on 10/21/2003 5:11:04 PM PDT by LadyPilgrim

O'Reilly on Fox now.

1,991 posted on 10/21/2003 5:14:16 PM PDT by Graymatter

1,992 posted on 10/21/2003 5:14:16 PM PDT by Gelato

O'Reilly asked if the legislatures are interfering with the courts.

Rep. Murman said, "The courts are becoming judicial activists."

FOX NEW says Murman sponsored the bill today.

1,993 posted on 10/21/2003 5:21:05 PM PDT by Gelato

YES - 348

NO - 908 (72%)

This is very surprising and disappointing. Although the general public hasn't heard anything or if they have it's that Terri is a vegetable.

Think Michael is very busy voting tonight

1,994 posted on 10/21/2003 5:22:13 PM PDT by fiesti

Someone clue me in...

Is there some definition of "vegetative state" the press keeps using that I'm missing??!

1,995 posted on 10/21/2003 5:24:28 PM PDT by Ladysmith (Low-carbing works!! (223.0 (-37.6)))

I think they are just reading the words given to them.
Bad idea. Bad idea!

1,996 posted on 10/21/2003 5:26:00 PM PDT by LadyPilgrim

I am not talking about situations like Terri's. What if I choose not to immunize my children and well-meaning liberals believe it is for their welfare that they get immunized against my wishes. What is to prevent them from using this legislation as precedent to veto my parental rights?

1,997 posted on 10/21/2003 5:27:55 PM PDT by Don'tMessWithTexas

...Michael Schiavo is seeking a hearing in a half-hour for injuction...

This will be the time for Jeb to stand tall at the courthouse.

1,998 posted on 10/21/2003 5:28:32 PM PDT by GopherIt

Your "concerns" sound like hand-wringing to me

Have you ever heard of the law of unintended consequences? Sure this could affect euthanasia, but it could also allow a far-reaching liberal state to impose its will on conservative Christian parents that choose alternative lifestyles or educations for their children.

1,999 posted on 10/21/2003 5:31:15 PM PDT by Don'tMessWithTexas

To: Don'tMessWithTexas

...What is to prevent them from using this legislation as precedent to veto my parental rights?
...

You, my friend, you. Are you a Texan or what?

2,000 posted on 10/21/2003 5:31:35 PM PDT by GopherIt

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794