Christians call on Bush Bros. to Save Shaivo

[chomerics]

Yep, this is politicking at it's finest, and this has got to be the most disgusting thing I have ever seen in politics in my lifetime.

Coalition Calls Upon Bush to Save Schiavo's Life by Using Police Powers

Press Conferences in Washington and Tallahassee on March 23 at noon.

To: National Desk

Contact: Joe Giganti, 703-928-9695, Joe@VeritasMediaGroup.com

WASHINGTON, March 23 /Christian Wire Service/ -- The 11th Hour Coalition to Save Terri Schiavo's Life will hold simultaneous press conferences -- Wednesday, March 23 -- at 12 noon in Washington, D.C., and Tallahassee, Fla.

This ad hoc partnership of religious and political organizations -- which will gather in front of the White House and the Florida governor's mansion -- will call on President George W. Bush and Gov. Jeb Bush to use their executive powers to protect Terri Schiavo from starvation.

"There are two people in the United States who can save Terri Schiavo's life right now. The president of the United States and the governor of Florida have the authority to use the police services at their disposal to take Terri into protective custody, restore her food and hydration, and arrest anyone who would interfere," said Dr. Paul Schenck, executive director of the National Pro-Life Action Center on Capitol Hill. "For the sake of Terri's life, we cannot afford to wait while the courts dither over jurisdiction."

http://www.earnedmedia.org/cfts0323.htm

From the post. . .

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A58819-2005Mar23_2.html

Gov. Bush Seeks Custody of Schiavo

Options Narrow As 3 More Courts Rule Against Fla. Woman's Parents

By Manuel Roig-Franzia

Washington Post Staff Writer

Thursday, March 24, 2005; Page A01

PINELLAS PARK, Fla., March 23 -- Florida Gov. Jeb Bush again raised the possibility that state officials would intervene in the frantic battle over Terri Schiavo on Wednesday, asserting that the state may have authority to take custody of the brain-damaged woman even though the federal courts have refused to resume her tube-feeding.

A Circuit Court judge here in Pinellas County issued an order preventing the Adult Protective Team of the Florida Department of Children and Families from taking Schiavo from her hospice and reinserting her feeding tube, but the possibility of an appeal or some other move by the state lent a dramatic note to the rapidly moving legal struggle.

Bush's attempt to once again enter the case came the same day that Schiavo's parents, Robert and Mary Schindler, were twice rejected by a federal appeals court and lost a battle in the Florida Legislature to keep their daughter alive. Undeterred, the Schindlers pushed their case to the next court level, appealing to the U.S. Supreme Court, while still hoping that Bush would come up with a way to use the power of Florida's state government to trump the courts.

Do these people have absolutely no respect for the Constitution ??? :doh:

[NoCalMike]

:puke:

[SkinsHokieFan]

Originally posted by chomerics

Yep, this is politicking at it's finest, and this has got to be the most disgusting thing I have ever seen in politics in my lifetime.

http://www.earnedmedia.org/cfts0323.htm

From the post. . .

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A58819-2005Mar23_2.html

Do these people have absolutely no respect for the Constitution ??? :doh:

The most disgusting thing in politics you have ever seen? Come on Cho, you lived through the Clinton years

[ColdnGrey]

Originally posted by SkinsHokieFan

The most disgusting thing in politics you have ever seen? Come on Cho, you lived through the Clinton years

High-yo!

[DarkLadyRaven]

Originally posted by SkinsHokieFan

The most disgusting thing in politics you have ever seen? Come on Cho, you lived through the Clinton years

I agree those damn republicans were on a damn near witch hunt

:point2sky

[SkinsHokieFan]

Originally posted by DarkLadyRaven

I agree those damn republicans were on a damn near witch hunt

:point2sky

Touche.

But a President lying under oath?

Hmmmm.....

[dreamingwolf]

Let me state first that I think they should just give her a shot and be done with it. This probably should have been done 12 years ago.

Objectively. Lets look at it on an individuals stance. We have two players.

Husband: She told me she would never want to be kept alive like this and she should have her tube removed.

Parents: She was a devoute catholic and this action would be against her beliefs.

The thing about this that bothers me is it seems the husband has more power over the womens parents over the life of their child. To me that is stunning. Maybe Im wrong in the assessment cause Im not following it that close at all, but really if it was your kid wouldnt you want the call to end it or not. I personally would end it, but still I would want the call and I think this is what the stink is over.

The hardcore of me says this, if the parents want to drag her along untill they cant afford it anymore and she dies anyways fine. However, the state comming in and saying that despite what her parents want they must watch her die to me is so mind boggling I cant imagine it. I would imagine that if I had children, that if the state told me to give up on the child and let it die I would do the same as them. Regardless of the futility.

I dont understand how the state can tell you not to waste your money keeping your child alive, however I will qualify this by saying if the state is footing the bill for feeding her then well they do have a right to say the nite is over.

But if the parents are willing to give all they have to keep her alive they should be able to, regardless of how nonsensicle it is. The arguement that its more humane just to kill her doesnt float with me, cause that removes choice from the individual to the "intellectual" superiors and you know who you are. People should be allowed to make their own choices. This choice seems to becoming from the husband and the state, and as a parent I would feel so trod on.

If the husband is legal bound to her, then he should be allowed to make the parents her ward and be done with it that way.

[smsmith40]

I don't usually post on US domestic issues but this seems to me to be pretty universal.

I think the whole issue boils down to one question.

Who do we belong to? As a human being, who besides ourselves, is responsible for us. Is it our parents, who created our life, or is it our partner who we have voluntarily chosen to share our life with?

I'm not sure I can answer that question other to say that my wife knows me and and how I think way better than my parents. That is not going to be the case in all instances.

One thing is definite, the government has no place in this.

[dreamingwolf]

I think women understand us more than we understand them, we think we know them but they are far to tricky for us. You make a good point, that intimate knowledge could mean more than social peronas. Even on family levels.

How do you prove those intimate desires though? One could use that intimate excuse to make any claim and thats why Im suprised the court is bullying it up.

If one thing that this stir should teach us is that we all should have a living will regardless of our age.

[Chief skin]

Bush owes them, they are not satasfied with the bone he threw them getting the federal government involved. They elected him now they want there pay back and they see this issue as it. Karl Rove's minions want what they are owed. Politics aside and they should have never been brought into this in the first place,Michael should just let her parents be her guardian.

[Thiebear]

Crazy huh? A religious organization is fighting to save someones life.. Don't see that everyday..

OHHH Wait you do.. even for death row inmates..

Nothing to see here, move along people... For this to be the most disgusting what do you consider fighting to kill someone???

[codeorama]

Originally posted by Thiebear

Crazy huh? A religious organization is fighting to save someones life.. Don't see that everyday..

OHHH Wait you do.. even for death row inmates..

Nothing to see here, move along people... For this to be the most disgusting what do you consider fighting to kill someone???

I actually agree with you here.

I still think this whole issue has blown out of hand.

The government does not need to be involved.

I wonder if these christian groups are willing to pay Terri's medical bills?

[Prosperity]

Originally posted by Thiebear

Crazy huh? A religious organization is fighting to save someones life.. Don't see that everyday..

OHHH Wait you do.. even for death row inmates..

Nothing to see here, move along people... For this to be the most disgusting what do you consider fighting to kill someone???

Trying to get the executive office of government to use police powers as a way to undermine the legislative and judicial brenches of the Federal and State level is disgusting.

The state courts and legislature both decided that the plaintiffs were wrong. Let's keep in mind that this is a STATE issue and that Congress had no business getting involved, but the case was thrown out at the Federal level too.

Yeah the GOP is for state's rights, unless the state does something they disagree with.

[gbear]

Liberty,

you forgot to mention they are for the sanctity of marriage...oh wait...they're only for strengthening the marriage bond some of the time.

[Thiebear]

I thought there were Republicans and Democrats that believed in this.. I totally agreed with "LANNY DAVIS" last night.. First time EVAH!

[stevenaa]

"Trying to get the executive office of government to use police powers as a way to undermine the legislative and judicial brenches of the Federal and State level is disgusting"

The thing is, the Judicial is bound to interpret the constitution. In this case, the state constitution. If the findings of the court are not in line with the constitiution, it is incumbent on the executive branch to step in.

Now, i'm not sure how I feel about this situation. If Terry truly did tell her husband that she would not want to be kept alive like this, then they should pull the tube. The question for me is, did she tell him that? He is remarried and has his own life away from her now. What is in it for him to have the tube disconnected? Is there some outstanding life insurance or other benefit he stands to gain? I just can't understand what motivation he has at this point other than fulfilling his wifes wishes.

If I was in his situation, and my wife had told me she wouldn't want this, I would fight for her just as he has. Unfortunately, without a living will, we can't know for certain and should probably err on the side of life.

[Prosperity]

Originally posted by stevenaa

The thing is, the Judicial is bound to interpret the constitution. In this case, the state constitution. If the findings of the court are not in line with the constitiution, it is incumbent on the executive branch to step in.

No actually the Supreme Court of the US steps in. In no way does the executive branch intervene. after the judges decide.

[gbear]

Changing which judge sees a case because you didnt get the answer you liked from the past 22 (and counting) courts. Now that the courts still aren't ruling the way they want...now is when they say it shouldn't have been the courts decision at all and it should be an executive decision? Seriously? To my mind, that's a call I'd have a lot easier time respecting if the same people hadn't already made the case "well it should really be in court B (fed) rather than court A (state) anyway." As hard a time as I had with that logic, now they're saying "it shouldn't be a court issue." Of course this is after trying the "it should be a legislative issue" a few times too. At this point, they aren't looking for a proper methodology, they just want their way and seem to have little care for any rule of law that gets them to the place thwy want to be (hence passing laws with no future impacts?).

As for your comments about there being people from both parties believing in these values, I think that is true (marriage). It's just that lately the call from the right is that it's the left and Dems weakening the institution of marriage. Then they go forth and say the bond of marriage doesn't mean the husband would know best what the wife wanted/would have wanted.

[SkinsNut73]

Originally posted by chomerics

Do these people have absolutely no respect for the Constitution ??? :doh:

I think they do have respect for the Constitution...but have more respect for God. They are obeying God rather than man in their eyes.

[flyingtiger1013]

Originally posted by chomerics

Yep, this is politicking at it's finest, and this has got to be the most disgusting thing I have ever seen in politics in my lifetime.

Don't get out much, do ya?

[Henry]

Originally posted by SkinsNut73

I think they do have respect for the Constitution...but have more respect for God. They are obeying God rather than man in their eyes.

Sorry, but as a citizen of this country that's not my problem. The government cannot afford to see things through the eyes of one religion ... not at the expense of our system of checks and balances. Until we decide to set up a thoecracy in this country, we shouldn't ignore two branches of the government simply because we find them inconvenient.

[gbear]

I guess this is as good a place as any to bring my other reservation about this case. What happened to Terri's right to medical privacy?

So her husband is still her guardian, correct? Yet somehow others have made many comments on her health (nurses, docs on both sides, ect.). Let's just assume for a moment that someone like Frist has access to information about her condition...where does he get off saying anything? I'd be pissed if my docs took my condition to the press.

I kind of feel the same about the video tape. Who gave permission to air that tape? the parents? I always thought a person had a right to say what could could be aired and used for profit (and some right to life groups have profited according to post today)? As I understand things, wouldn't the person in the video have to agree or at a min the legal guardian? I know this came up when a conservative group took a picture of two gay men kissing and used it to fund raise (without asking the men). The two men sued (stupid, should have just used models but didn't).

I ask this because while it seems like many on the Right want her to be treated like a living human, they are simultaniously denying her the rights of a living being. Just something that struck me as interesting.

[@DCGoldPants]

You don't write laws for one person, and you don't change them when you don't like how its ruled for one person.

Justice is Blind, and its supposed to be..... whatever evidence the parents have tried to present just wasn't found credible.

You bring a Dr. who claims to be Nobel Prize Nominated.....and then turns out to be a mess...who's had legal troubles with Florida himself.

They just can't get their acts together.

[SkinsNut73]

Originally posted by Henry

Sorry, but as a citizen of this country that's not my problem. The government cannot afford to see things through the eyes of one religion ... not at the expense of our system of checks and balances. Until we decide to set up a thoecracy in this country, we shouldn't ignore two branches of the government simply because we find them inconvenient.

Henry,

I understand, and as a citizen of this country I feel the exact same way. All I was saying was I understand what they are doing. I'm not saying I wholeheartedly agree...but I understand the motivation.

[jenmdixon]

Originally posted by Henry

Sorry, but as a citizen of this country that's not my problem. The government cannot afford to see things through the eyes of one religion ... not at the expense of our system of checks and balances. Until we decide to set up a thoecracy in this country, we shouldn't ignore two branches of the government simply because we find them inconvenient.

Thank you, Henry. I could not have said it better.