Republicans show political hypocrisy with Schiavo intervention

LP News ^ | 04/06/2005 | LP

[libertarianben]

Playing to the demands of their Christian-right base, Republicans chose to abandon even the slightest notion that they support states' rights in the case of Terri Schiavo.

[Constitution Day]

"Republicans didn't support states rights!" It's the argument of a precosious 8th grader.

May I assume that you weren't too precocious?

;^)

[<1/1,000,000th%]

The Bill of Rights is part of Federal law. Any time a state breaks the law they invite the Feds in. This is not a states rights issue.

[Duke Nukum]

We heard all this from the pro-deathers already. Move on. Knock up some women and force them to get abortions to sate your blood lust if you must, it's completely legal, but quit preaching.

You'd make a great official in China, those that enforce the one child policy. You'd have a ball drowning the excess children.

[TigersEye]

Yeah, that 'State's right to starve gimps to death' is one we all need to get behind. /sarcasm

[goldstategop]

Democrats Show Political Hypocrisy With The Wal-mart Intervention. Take that, you Libertarian frauds!

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)

[Raycpa]

A government that results in the killing of a handicapped woman is a government that has a deep flaw in its construction.

[Jorge]

States have the right to kill innocent citizens? Cool! Let the killings begin! And if we can kill them, can't we also enslave them? States rights are awesome!

Please. Nonbody is advocating such a position.

This is the kind of hysterical nonsense that discredits your side.

[Jorge]

Was it RIGHT to starve a living Human Being to death? The answer is NO! and no rational being can say anything different. All retoric aside - - - It was not proper to starve a human being to death. Cease and desist, any other opinion is wrong.

So I guess you don't believe a person has the right to refuse a feeding tube or other means of medical life support under any circumstances?

Sorry, but according the law you're wrong.

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

[Raycpa]

Nonbody is advocating such a position.

Yes, slavery is so 1800's. Who wants slaves,when we have so much fun can dehydrateding helpless women.

[thoughtomator]

The Ninth Amendment comes before the Tenth Amendment.

I can't stand uneducated anarchists who call themselves libertarian. It makes me sick.

[Jorge]

Yes, slavery is so 1800's. Who wants slaves,when we have so much fun can dehydrateding helpless women.

You really need to take a deep breath and try to articulate your position in more rational terms.

[Leatherneck_MT]

This hasn't a damned thing to do with States Rights, this has to do with the Murder of an Innocent by an out of control THUG in black robes.

[Raycpa]

You really need to take a deep breath and try to articulate your position in more rational terms.

A woman is dead. That is rational as it gets. We allowed her to be dehydrated, that too is rational. What is irrational is the concept killing a woman is somehow humane or moral.

[Jorge]

"You really need to take a deep breath and try to articulate your position in more rational terms."

A woman is dead. That is rational as it gets.

A lot of people are dead. For a lot of different reasons. Some seemingly more rational than others.

We allowed her to be dehydrated, that too is rational. What is irrational is the concept killing a woman is somehow humane or moral.

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?

It just amazes me how shallow and simplistic the so-called pro-life arguments are on this issue.

People with absolutely no understanding of difficult end of life issues passing judgment on everbody else ...

[TigersEye]

People with absolutely no understanding of difficult end of life issues passing judgment on everbody else ...

That's funny. Why have the organizations for disabled people supported Terri?

[Jorge]

This hasn't a damned thing to do with States Rights, this has to do with the Murder of an Innocent by an out of control THUG in black robes.

This kind of inflamatory rhetoric has NOTHING to do with the debate.

You need to educate yourself on the law when it comes to end of life decisions and stop embarrassing your side with these sort hatefilled and hyterical accusations.

[Jorge]

"People with absolutely no understanding of difficult end of life issues passing judgment on everbody else ..."

That's funny. Why have the organizations for disabled people supported Terri?

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

They're not medical experts, and have no right to dictate law when it comes to situations like this.

[TigersEye]

So no one but you understands difficult end of life issues?

[TigersEye]

People with absolutely no understanding of difficult end of life issues passing judgment on everbody else

People like Joni Eareckson Tada?