Schiavo Case: Santorum Unfit for Office of Presidency

[jillian]

I think that I wouldn't want my spouse to show utter contempt for my family.

I guess I just don't have any sympathy for Mikey Schiavo. He didn't start advocating for pulling the tube on his wife until AFTER he won a huge settlement against her doctors. Then he was all about winning this huge settlment to take care of all her needs.

Once he got the money? New wife and pull the plug. C'Ya! And when her family objected, he fought to have her put down. And he kept doing it even after burning through all the settlement money.

if you can interrupt your absurd spew of venom for a moment...

he *was* her family. the law gave him the right to act on her behalf. the courts had reviewed the case up to the appellate level and back. no one believed he wasn't acting in her best interests... except her parents.

this isn't about whether you would have acted in the same fashion. it's about whether the rightwingnut loons in congress should have addressed this issue in legislation.

do you know, the only time baby bush ever interrupted one of his vacations down on the ranch was to come back to DC in the middle of the night to sign that bill into law?

The women's dead right?? case closed he got what he wanted.

much to do about nothing.

The women was never going to recover,but the extra time that was spent looking close at her wasn't the wrong way,We should always look to preserve life not take it,starving to death doesn't sound so good does it.

the scrutiny wasn't the problem. the courts had already looked at it from the trial level through the appellate level and back.

it was the politicizing it by the religious right that was the problem.

 

[JoeB131]

if you can interrupt your absurd spew of venom for a moment...

he *was* her family. the law gave him the right to act on her behalf. the courts had reviewed the case up to the appellate level and back. no one believed he wasn't acting in her best interests... except her parents.

this isn't about whether you would have acted in the same fashion. it's about whether the rightwingnut loons in congress should have addressed this issue in legislation.

do you know, the only time baby bush ever interrupted one of his vacations down on the ranch was to come back to DC in the middle of the night to sign that bill into law?

So, hey, it's perfectly okay we starved a woman to death because, the courts said it was okay? Really?

The guy was a creep. Congress- both parties- voted to tell the courts to take a look at this case anew, and the courts said, "Screw that. We're the guys in the Robes!"

 

[JoeB131]

the scrutiny wasn't the problem. the courts had already looked at it from the trial level through the appellate level and back.

it was the politicizing it by the religious right that was the problem.

Yeah, heaven forbid that we intentionally euthanize people.

Schiavo was not being kept alive by a machine. She had to be intentionally killed by her doctors.

Doctors who apparently never heard of Hippocrates.

 

[DaGoose]

The thing was, she wasn't "unplugged", she was systematically starved to death over a period of something like 15 days.

Ok, fair enough. But I have to ask...........

1) What would YOU have wanted if you were in her exact position? (vegetative state, liquidated brain, no hope for recovery)

2) Do you think it is the role of the Executive and Legislative Branches of the Federal Government to take decisions away from families and doctors? (Keep in mind this was already played out in court.)

I think that I wouldn't want my spouse to show utter contempt for my family.

I guess I just don't have any sympathy for Mikey Schiavo. He didn't start advocating for pulling the tube on his wife until AFTER he won a huge settlement against her doctors. Then he was all about winning this huge settlment to take care of all her needs.

Once he got the money? New wife and pull the plug. C'Ya! And when her family objected, he fought to have her put down. And he kept doing it even after burning through all the settlement money.

Way to dodge the questions I asked.

 

[JoeB131]

Ok, fair enough. But I have to ask...........

1) What would YOU have wanted if you were in her exact position? (vegetative state, liquidated brain, no hope for recovery)

2) Do you think it is the role of the Executive and Legislative Branches of the Federal Government to take decisions away from families and doctors? (Keep in mind this was already played out in court.)

I think that I wouldn't want my spouse to show utter contempt for my family.

I guess I just don't have any sympathy for Mikey Schiavo. He didn't start advocating for pulling the tube on his wife until AFTER he won a huge settlement against her doctors. Then he was all about winning this huge settlment to take care of all her needs.

Once he got the money? New wife and pull the plug. C'Ya! And when her family objected, he fought to have her put down. And he kept doing it even after burning through all the settlement money.

Way to dodge the questions I asked.

I didn't dodge the question. I didn't give you the answer you wanted to hear, which I suspect would be something like "I would never want to live like that."

Point was, he was all for keeping her alive when there was money to be made.

There was a dispute between her family and her husband. The courts took the husband's side, the legislature (including A LOT of Democrats) took the families side.

 

[editec]

Dante?

NONE of them are really conservatives.

No GOPer in the race is a small government con (not even Ron Paul) and obviously Obama isn't either.

And none of them are really liberals, either.

Meaningless labels like these are DESIGNED to confuse us.

Stop asking what they ARE, and start studying what they DO.

If one does that, one arrives at the conclusion that these labels are meaningless.

 

[Gagafritz]

Liberalism - The Culture of Death. Kill your babies, kill your grandma, kill your disabled friends and relatives, and engage in a lifestyle that results in your early demise.

 

[konradv]

The Fourteenth Amendment specifically prohibits the states from taking someones life without due process. What crime was Terry Schiavo guilty of that empowered the state to terminate her life? When was she convicted of it.

If any state tries to terminate someones life, the Federal Government has a responsibility under the United States Constitution to prevent it from happening without due process.

I know you think that anyone who is unhealthy or somehow "less" human should be killed. But the protection of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness has always been an American value. And it will continue to be so, regardless of much you complain.

There are plenty of things to complain about Santorum on, this sure as heck isn't one of them.

The state didn't take her life. It simply allowed her husband to carry out her final wishes. It was the family that wanted state intrusion. They were a truly selfish bunch. They wanted a toy to play with, so they could pretend she was still there. When has anyone said, "if there's no hope, keep me alive anyway"? Who would know better, the husband or the family? After all he went through for her, the way he was treated was dispicable.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Well, we can only hope then that Santorum gets the nomination,

then we can find out definitively if the conservatives are right...that what this country really wants is a truely genuine hard core rightwing Republican for president.

If he loses, maybe they'll shut up about it...okay...that's not going to happen...

 

[DaGoose]

I think that I wouldn't want my spouse to show utter contempt for my family.

I guess I just don't have any sympathy for Mikey Schiavo. He didn't start advocating for pulling the tube on his wife until AFTER he won a huge settlement against her doctors. Then he was all about winning this huge settlment to take care of all her needs.

Once he got the money? New wife and pull the plug. C'Ya! And when her family objected, he fought to have her put down. And he kept doing it even after burning through all the settlement money.

Way to dodge the questions I asked.

I didn't dodge the question. I didn't give you the answer you wanted to hear, which I suspect would be something like "I would never want to live like that."

Point was, he was all for keeping her alive when there was money to be made.

There was a dispute between her family and her husband. The courts took the husband's side, the legislature (including A LOT of Democrats) took the families side.

Ok, so if I hear you right...........

1) You would NOT want to be kept alive under those circumstances.

2) You think that families should have to petition the federal government to make the final decision in matters like this because the feds know best.

 

[Gagafritz]

A better solution would be to require everyone to have an Advanced Directive in place so that your wishes are known to everyone prior to having to make these decisions. Then, certain things can be withheld based on your choosing.

 

[DaGoose]

Liberalism - The Culture of Death. Kill your babies, kill your grandma, kill your disabled friends and relatives, and engage in a lifestyle that results in your early demise.

Conservatism: The culture of small government that does not force itself on citizens freedoms (unless it's something we're opposed to which makes us hypocrites).

 

[Sallow]

The Fourteenth Amendment specifically prohibits the states from taking someones life without due process. What crime was Terry Schiavo guilty of that empowered the state to terminate her life? When was she convicted of it.

If any state tries to terminate someones life, the Federal Government has a responsibility under the United States Constitution to prevent it from happening without due process.

I know you think that anyone who is unhealthy or somehow "less" human should be killed. But the protection of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness has always been an American value. And it will continue to be so, regardless of much you complain.

There are plenty of things to complain about Santorum on, this sure as heck isn't one of them.

The state didn't terminate her life. No one terminated her life. Confusing as that may sound.

They allowed her body to work on it's own. In my opinion..it would have been far kinder to put her out of her misery.

 

[Sallow]

the scrutiny wasn't the problem. the courts had already looked at it from the trial level through the appellate level and back.

it was the politicizing it by the religious right that was the problem.

Yeah, heaven forbid that we intentionally euthanize people.

Schiavo was not being kept alive by a machine. She had to be intentionally killed by her doctors.

Doctors who apparently never heard of Hippocrates.

She wasn't killed by anyone.

If she wanted to eat..she could have asked for food.

 

[Sallow]

Liberalism - The Culture of Death. Kill your babies, kill your grandma, kill your disabled friends and relatives, and engage in a lifestyle that results in your early demise.

Conservatism: The culture of small government that does not force itself on citizens freedoms (unless it's something we're opposed to which makes us hypocrites).

Wonder how many babies, grandmas, disabled friends and relatives died in Iraq?

 

[Gagafritz]

Well, why intervene to save anyone? If someone gets hit by a bus and is laying on the street, it is up to them to crawl to the hospital if they really want treatment.

 

[Missourian]

Bullshit. That wasn't about the 14th Amendment or the "state taking a life".

This was about a decision that was made by her husband and her doctor to "unplug" a comatose patient, his wife, with no hope of recovery.

This was also about the Executive and Legislative branches of the Federal Government attempting to interfere in a decision that only belonged to the husband and her doctor.

I know YOU favor "big gubmint activism" forcing what YOU consider "moral" upon the masses, but if I'm ever in a position where I have to make a horrible decision like that I'll thank you and the Federal Government to simply stay the fuck out of my business.

I
The thing was, she wasn't "unplugged", she was systematically starved to death over a period of something like 15 days.

Ok, fair enough. But I have to ask...........

1) What would YOU have wanted if you were in her exact position? (vegetative state, liquidated brain, no hope for recovery)

2) Do you think it is the role of the Executive and Legislative Branches of the Federal Government to take decisions away from families and doctors? (Keep in mind this was already played out in court.)

If my brain was liquid, I wouldn't care one way or the other.

If I was in her exact position, I would be more concerned about my folks than my spouse.

 

[konradv]

Well, why intervene to save anyone? If someone gets hit by a bus and is laying on the street, it is up to them to crawl to the hospital if they really want treatment.

That's what the Reps want, right? If we're not to have universal insurance, anyone found dying on the side of the road with no insurance, should be left there. To do otherwise would be SOCIALISM, right?

 

[konradv]

I
The thing was, she wasn't "unplugged", she was systematically starved to death over a period of something like 15 days.

Ok, fair enough. But I have to ask...........

1) What would YOU have wanted if you were in her exact position? (vegetative state, liquidated brain, no hope for recovery)

2) Do you think it is the role of the Executive and Legislative Branches of the Federal Government to take decisions away from families and doctors? (Keep in mind this was already played out in court.)

If my brain was liquid, I wouldn't care one way or the other.

If I was in her exact position, I would be more concerned about my folks than my spouse.

If you were in her position, you'd have no concerns. I'd be more conerned about her wishes than her family's. Who's ever heard anyone say "if there's no hope, keep me alive anyway"? Who would know better than the spouse regarding one's wishes in this regard? Bottom line, get a Living Will and no one will have to through this on your behalf.

 

[Gagafritz]

Conservatives are not anti-Govt or for anarchy. Sorry, but you don't seem to know the difference.