Anyone else as disgusted with congress on this issue as me? The political grandstanding on this case makes me want to puke. A heart surgeon looks at a vdeotape and decides to overule numerous legal and medical rulings by neurosurgeons (well it's only their specialty) and say she isn't brain dead. Couldn't have to do with a big pander to the religious right to help his bona fides with them when he runs for president in 2006 could it Senator Frist?

State rights were thorwn out the window and you see idiots parade in front of the camera that are trying to make the case that this case hasn't gotten the legal attention it's due even though it's been ongoing for years and been in front of 19 different jusges, 6 different courts, and been turned down for review on several occasions by the USSC.

There's a ton I could write about this case but in the interest of brevity I'll stop here.

I think they should stay out of her affairs and let the rest of her die. From what I've read she is brain dead with no awareness.

I would never want to exist like this.

Exactly. Nor could I watch a loved one live like this.

I agree this group of republicans in office have decided that we are a monarchy, and that they know best for all.

The thing that disgusts me most is the deal making that both parties are engaged in using this issue to play off of, it is VERY pathetic and disheartening as to how our system of government is operated

if trhis is allowed then the checks and balance system that has been the center piece backbone of protection of our rights in the USA will be coompletely eroded !

any decent citizen NO MATER what party will not allow this to take place and for new laws in the 11th hr to override years of court proceddings on this subject!

I was out at dinner last night and it was mentioned that the US puts up a great fight preventing the death of this poor woman that is brain dead but will happily execute a man with the mind of a child.

Someone accuse her of murder , get a Public defender , she isn't a celebrity , she'll be found guilty ;-))

one of the primary functions of any government is to protect its citizens. people should consider that fact while calling this a "personal issue", as it is much more complicated than that.

I know what a moderate or progressive Afghani must have felt as he watched the Taliban rise to power ...

Extremely poor precedent.......

There are already ways that this could have been thrown into federal courts without new legislation.

Sad isn't it


I find our present government to be very frightening

And how exactly would that help Bush amongst the viewers of Mullah Robertson?

one of the primary functions of any government is to protect its citizens. people should consider that fact while calling this a "personal issue", as it is much more complicated than that. [/b][/quote]
It has been the most litagted "right-to-die" case in the history of the courts. It's been in front of 19 different judges, 6 different courts, and the USSC has denied the case several times. It has had extensive legal coverage and has always been a state court issue. A spouses rights to act as gaurdian has alwasy been upgheld by the courts and noow the republicans, who supposedly value the sanctity of marriage, are actively working to undermine one of the benfits/p[rotections that have always been associated with marriage. The Republicans, for poltical purposes which were outlined in a memo they distributed, have thrown aside their states rights ands "sanctity" of marriage positions to intervein in this ONE case because it can benefit them politically and panders to their right wing base.

one of the primary functions of any government is to protect its citizens. people should consider that fact while calling this a "personal issue", as it is much more complicated than that. [/b][/quote]
You are right.

Proof that it is much more complicated than that is the fact that this case has been litigated for over a decade already.

This is a case of political grandstanding. The irony of reactionaries like Frist and Delay invoking the 14th Ammendment is only exceeded by the degree to which the backers of states' rights will trample those rights when things don't go their way, and how the defenders of traditional marriage will trample those rights when things don't go their way.

it would *almost* be worth it to spend the rest of my life on Death Row,
to be able to walk into her hospital room and blow her head off live on CNN

I wonder how this case would have went had it been a poor black man in a vegetative state

The plug is pulled on people every day whether it be respirator, feed tubes or whatever.

The only difference in this case is the press is involved working people into a lather.

The real issue at hand is being totally convoluted by the lawyers as they try to play every loophole they can to keep her alive. Last one I heard was that Terri's rights were being violated because her religious beliefs weren't being considered.

All a bunch of crap, the real issue here is parents in denial about the daugher being an eggplant wanting to claim their wishes overrides that of the husband.

I am a little taken aback at how people think this issue is not worth the debate. irrespective of political affiliations or partisan politics a persons family desperately wants to see her live. everyone makes all these various arguements... however, if you were the parent of a child, would you accept her husbands decision to kill her? would you just say "oh well... thats the way it goes?" or "the law is the law and sometimes you win some and sometimes you lose some"? I doubt it. I mean come on... the guy said "kill my wife please" and the family is fighting that and everyone acts like its a discussion about towing away an old car that is overturned in the middle of the street.

from what i have seen there is basically a family fighting for the life of their family member and one guy fighting to kill her. the courts have heard the arguments, but i dont think people should be surprised that it is a sensitive issue and to characterize it as nothing more than political grandstanding seems a little off given the support of congress to keep her alive. it would be interesting to see how they voted on this... but from what i have seen, it seems that support for keeping her alive was overwhelming. when Ted Kennedy and George Bush can unwaiveringly agree on something, one might even start to believe in devine intervention.

JR - you keep saying that Schiavo's husband wants to kill her. I don't think that's the case. I think he wants to let her go. I think he feels that what killed her is the illness that put her there 16 years, six judges, and god alone knows how many lawyers ago.

Now, you can repeat verbatim the attacks on his character that the supporters of her family have because he has not chosen the martyr route that they have. Maybe he is an asshole and their shit don't stink - but I personally am not going to judge the man. It's just not as simple as you want to make it.

I can understand the parent's need to cling onto hope. God forbid that I should ever have to make such a decision about my daughters - making the decision to terminate life support for my mother was hard enough, and she was far worse off than the family claims Terry Schiavo is.

All that being said - the Congress of the United States had no business being involved in this tragic situation.

http://www.npr.org/templates/rundown...wn.php?prgId=2

About midway down the page you'll find a link to an interesting interview with a court-appointed guardian for Schiavo, and a link to a report he prepared on the case for some of the litigation two years ago.

it almost seems as though you did not read my post. i simply said that they both seem to have valid concerns and arguments... and was trying to say that i am a little surprised at peoples reactions to this, regardless of what side they are on. there is nothing about this that is black and white in my opinion. the family wants one thing and are justified in my opinion. the husband wants another thing which seems to be justifiable as well. maybe my tone comes off much different than i intend it do. just as the dr says in the interview you posted... she smiles and she does a lot of things that would indicate to someone that wanted to believe that she might somewhat aware of or conscious of her surroundings or is capable of indicating from time to time that she might be. thats sort of my point.. its not an easy or simple decision and i think both sides are right to fight for what they believe is the right thing to do because you can't undo death.

i heard family members speaking out on this issue and they seemed to be quite respectful towards him and were pretty clear that they did not believe he had any ill-will or bad intentions... and this was right after he stopped their visitation rights.

The family doesn't need to say bad things about Terry's husband, JR ... they have plenty of people doing it for them.

I can understand how the family feels that her husband "wants to kill her." My grandmother accused me of killing my mother - but my mother had been dead for six weeks when my brother and I made that decision, even if her body persisted in some of its functions.

I guess my sympathy for her family has been dimishing for a long time, as her brother in particular has become the darling of any number of right wing political groups.

Once again - I don't question the need for the debate. I think the true reason for much of the grandstanding this weekend was exemplified by the leaked memo pointing out what a great political opportunity this was for the Republicans.

Of course, I'm waiting for someone to blame THAT on Dan Rather.

IMHO, which is just that and may change at any point in the future..

The plug should have been pulled when her husband told the doctors treating her of her wishes, despite her parents wishes.

Lets not forget, this guy is now legally married to another woman, has footed the bill for her time in hospital and, is pretty much up the creek without a paddle no matter what happens to her.

I do also beleive the media has played a lot in the issue of congress taking up the case, this should have been, but never was, a private case between the family, the state shouldnt have intervened (sp?).

That being said, i honestly dont know what *I* would do if i were in the same position, on one hand, letting someone die peacefully would, to me, be the moral thing to do.

If i were the person in question, id be sure to have the plug pulled, i wouldnt want to be fed through a tube, even if i could swallow on my own purely for the fact that i would want my family to get on with their lives.