Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Ethics/Values in politics
C-Span sucks community > politics > Political Soapbox
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190
csh
QUOTE(davisął @ Mar 23 2005, 12:56 PM)
Molly Ivins
RELEASE: THURSDAY, MARCH 17, 2005, AND THEREAFTER
AUSTIN, Texas -- The John Wesley Hardin Died for You Society has a theme song that goes: "He wasn't really bad. He was just a victim of his times." I sometimes find this useful in trying to explain Texas political ethics to outsiders.

My theory is that few Texas pols are actual crooks, they just have an overdeveloped sense of the extenuating circumstance. Woodrow Wilson Bean once warned himself that he was skatin' close to the thin edge of ethics. After a moment, he concluded, "Woodrow Wilson Bean, ethics is for young lawyers."

We had a governor who was caught in a big, fat lie about a football scandal (serious stuff) and explained, "Well, there never was a Bible in the room."

Some civilians believe the definition of an honest Texas pol is one who stays bought. But among pols of the old school, the saying was, "If you can't take their money, drink their whiskey, screw their women and vote against 'em anyway, you don't belong in the Legislature." Many of our pols have the ethical sensitivity of a walnut. All this has led many to conclude erroneously that Tom DeLay, an alumnus of the Texas Legislature, is somehow our fault.

I grant you a certain resemblance to some of our more notorious standards: "Everybody does it" and "They did it first" are actually considered excuses here. But I categorically reject cultural responsibility for Tom DeLay. Real Texas politicians are neither hypocritical nor sanctimonious. A pol does what he must -- fish gotta swim, birds gotta fly -- but no pol of the Old School, when DeLay served in the Lege, would add self-righteousness to shady dealing.

Nor was hyper-partisanship practiced. Under Bill Hobby, Bob Bullock and Pete Laney, Republicans were given their fair share of power. In fact, Republicans and liberals sometimes joined forces against conservative Democrats.

This was before the time when religion was regularly dragged into politics. The idea that you were immune from ethical lapses because you had found Jesus did not fly here. Sanctimony stinks in the nostrils of the Lord.

Doing favors for big campaign donors may indeed be an "everybody does it," but when those favors take the form of laws that directly hurt your people, you're supposed to draw the line. Over the line is where Texas pols would put using a children's charity as a cover for collecting soft money from special interest groups and then spending it on dinners, a golf tournament, a rock concert, Broadway tickets and so forth. Because the money was supposedly for a charity, Celebrations for Children, Inc., special interests who wanted favors from DeLay were able to give him money without revealing themselves as campaign donors. Cute trick, Tom, but a really cruddy thing to do.

Christians, defend this please.

In another example of ethical rot, DeLay took a $100,000 check from the Corrections Corporation of America, a company that runs private prisons in Texas and has a 20-year history that includes mismanagement and abuse.
CCA wants the Texas Lege, over which DeLay exercises considerable sway because he's a money conduit, to privatize the prisons. And that check? Made out to DeLay's children's charity, the DeLay Foundation for Kids. Barf.


75% of the money goes to the kids 25% to the Republican party. Donations are even tax deductable. This scum uses abused children to hide Republican political donations. A fine Christian man of faith. Christians, defend this please.
Another quality that makes DeLay an un-Texas pol is that he's mean. By and large, Texas pols are an agreeable set of less-than-perfect humans and quite often well-intentioned. As Carl Parker of Port Arthur used to observe, if you took all the fools out of the Lege, it would not be a representative body any longer. The old sense of collegiality was strong, and vindictive behavior -- punishing pols for partisan reasons -- was simply not done. But those are Tom DeLay's specialties, his trademarks. The Hammer is not only genuinely feared in Washington, he is, I'm sorry to say, hated.

Some of the ethics charges against DeLay are just plain old-fashioned grubby -- letting a lobbyist pay for a fancy hotel in London and a golf trip to St. Andrews (Delay claims he didn't know it was lobby money, even though he was accompanied by the lobbyist). What sets DeLay apart is his response when his shoddy behavior is exposed.

He has been admonished three times by the House Ethics Committee, so did he clean up his act? Nope, he went after the chairman of the ethics committee, threw him out, got the rules changed and then stacked the committee with his close allies. "The ethics process in the House of Representatives is in total shambles," said Fred Wertheimer, a longtime D.C. crusader on ethical issues.

Tell us more about Jesus, you lowlife scum sucking vermin.

I haven't even mentioned DeLay's apparent violation of Texas campaign finance law, quite a feat, since we only have the one. Or the whole nasty and absurd redistricting mess, or the dubious donations to his legal defense fund, or the Indian casino gambling saga, or, or, or.

The Houston Chronicle, DeLay's home paper, has been vigilant about tracking his lapses. The paper recently summed up his m.o.: "When in danger of losing, simply rewrite the rules in the middle of the game to make it impossible for the other side to win."

This guy smells like a slop jar. Get him out of there.
http://www.creators.com/opinion_show.cfm?columnsName=miv
[right][snapback]68392[/snapback][/right]



Too bad those in Texas can not “recall” Delay like a “product Recall” because he is danger to the good people of the United States.

mad.gif
davisął
QUOTE(csh @ Mar 23 2005, 10:54 AM)
Too bad those in Texas can not “recall” Delay like a “product Recall” because he is danger to the good people of the United States.

mad.gif
[right][snapback]68490[/snapback][/right]



You got that right. And that piece of crap felon makes REAL, GENUINE Christians look like forking extremists for defending him even in the face of overwhelming evidence. And he plays on their feelings. User. Manipulator. Lowlife scumsucking vermin.



They may as well be following David Koresh.
Mizilus
I love how that filthy piece of sh-t has dodged cameras for weeks and now that the Terry Schiavo show is in full production this ethicsless piece of sh_t has been doing interviews every day.

f---- repuslickans.
davisął
QUOTE(Mizilus @ Mar 23 2005, 11:11 AM)
I love how that filthy piece of sh-t has dodged cameras for weeks and now that the Terry Schiavo show is in full production this ethicsless piece of sh_t has been doing interviews every day.

f---- repuslickans.
[right][snapback]68506[/snapback][/right]



hey madman, how goes it?

You aren't enjoying the spectacle?
Mizilus
Well right when I think everything they do is a joke, along comes this dog and pony show and they prove it.

Its such a joke that, as usual, the fascists get out front with their accusations. They accuse "the people who want to kill Terry" of doing all of this for partisan political purposes. Of course the "lburul media" just reports this bullsh-t and doesnt say another word. Repeat their lies over and over.

God. Imagine if they put this much time and energy into the country rather than their part and their pocketbooks.
Mizilus
Still, I have no idea whatsoever why this woman would have to starve to death.

If that isnt f---ed up and retarded I dont know what is. Maybe that is something these stupid bushlovers could do. Maybe they could pull their heads out of their asses long enough to decide how a hopelessly ill person could die with dignity in some more humane way.

Just the same if her mom and dad want her to live and want to take care of her, then why not?
davisął
QUOTE(Mizilus @ Mar 23 2005, 11:25 AM)
Still, I have no idea whatsoever why this woman would have to starve to death.

If that isnt f---ed up and retarded I dont know what is. Maybe that is something these stupid bushlovers could do. Maybe they could pull their heads out of their asses long enough to decide how a hopelessly ill person could die with dignity in some more humane way.

Just the same if her mom and dad want her to live and want to take care of her, then why not?
[right][snapback]68519[/snapback][/right]



What's f---ed up and retarded is people trying to decide in a short time, without medical professionals what that woman's wishes were. (and NO, that ssshloe Frist making a diagnosis from a home movie does NOT COUNT) Have you read any quotes from Michael Shiavo? It breaks my heart to see this turned into a circus. The husband is the final word. If you want to change a precident that big, don't do it over a weekend using emotional and religious catchphrases to make it seem appealing.



Who decides? The husband or parents? Or Tom forking DeLay?

I would NEVER allow my wife to go on like that for years if she told me she didn't want it.

I think forcing someone to live like that is absolutely disgusting.
davisął
I talked to some Roman Catholic friends of mine. They are in their 70s and said they would never want to be kept alive like that.

That's from two elderly Mexicans.
Nomarchy
QUOTE(davisął @ Mar 23 2005, 09:53 AM)
I talked to some Roman Catholic friends of mine. They are in their 70s and said they would never want to be kept alive like that.

That's from two elderly Mexicans.
[right][snapback]68546[/snapback][/right]


Sure, but would they prefer to starve to death in order to not "be kept alive like that"?

Starving to death, although a very natural way to die, would not be at the top of most people's preferences, now, would it?
Mizilus
The whole starving to death issue should be the issue.

If she had put it down in writing that she absolutely did not want to live this way what would the phony baloney reich wingers be saying?

Who the hell are they doing this for? One person? The whole country grinds to a halt and the News channels go into innundation mode?

No, I havent heard sh-t about what her husband is saying but I sure as hell get nearly wall to wall coverage of what this bullsh_t repuslickan and that one has to say about it.

So yeah, is this about one person or a narrow sliver of the population (evangelcals)? What a bunch of bullsh_t. And it isnt going over very well in the polls either. Maybe people are finally seeing through the veneer.
Bee
QUOTE(Mizilus @ Mar 23 2005, 01:02 PM)
The whole starving to death issue should be the issue.

If she had put it down in writing that she absolutely did not want to live this way what would the phony baloney reich wingers be saying?

Who the hell are they doing this for? One person? The whole country grinds to a halt and the News channels go into innundation mode?

No, I havent heard sh-t about what her husband is saying but I sure as hell get nearly wall to wall coverage of what this bullsh_t repuslickan and that one has to say about it.

So yeah, is this about one person or a narrow sliver of the population (evangelcals)? What a bunch of bullsh_t. And it isnt  going over very well in the polls either. Maybe people are finally seeing through the veneer.
[right][snapback]68561[/snapback][/right]


She will not starve. At one point the dehydration will cause major organ failure and she will pass. Doctors have said that it is a relatively "easy" death.

It's not as inhumane as RWers and the 'librul' media have painted it to be.

sad.gif
Nomarchy
QUOTE(Bee @ Mar 23 2005, 02:35 PM)
She will not starve. At one point the dehydration will cause major organ failure and she will pass. Doctors have said that it is a relatively "easy" death.

It's not as inhumane as RWers and the 'librul' media have painted it to be.

sad.gif
[right][snapback]68691[/snapback][/right]


Fair enough. But it ain't what a rational person would consider the 'prefered method' of effecting one's wish not to 'continue living in a persistent vegetative state'. That's MY point, completely independently of party lines, etc.
Bee
QUOTE(Nomarchy @ Mar 23 2005, 05:40 PM)
Fair enough. But it ain't what a rational person would consider the 'prefered method' of effecting one's wish not to 'continue living in a persistent vegetative state'. That's MY point, completely independently of party lines, etc.
[right][snapback]68697[/snapback][/right]


I understand. I only pointed it out to make posters like me that are horrified at the idea of allowing any biological unit to feel pain, that there isn't really much pain involved.

The thought comforts me smally.

Independent of party politics.

csh
The movie PSYCO by Alfred Hitchcock:

The last scene, where Bates was sitting in a chair in the stark white room, there, also is a bug in that room. When he sees the bug, he begins to think. The audience hears his voice; <sic> “I am not a bad person. I can kill that bug. They should see that I will let that bug live. I can not kill. I am not a bad person”

Now, there is an analogy to the current US government.

The legislature can abdicate their war powers to men who have been recorded that they think nukes are a good deterrent.

They will invade a sovereign State and murder thousands of people, besides the maiming and death to their constituents sons and daughters.

Yet, this same legislature wants to propagate the idea that they are life loving good people.
Mizilus
QUOTE(Bee @ Mar 23 2005, 02:35 PM)
She will not starve. At one point the dehydration will cause major organ failure and she will pass. Doctors have said that it is a relatively "easy" death.

It's not as inhumane as RWers and the 'librul' media have painted it to be.

sad.gif
[right][snapback]68691[/snapback][/right]



Please...

I would not do that to any living creature that I loved let alone a family member.
Arturo_Vandelay
QUOTE(Mizilus @ Mar 23 2005, 03:59 PM)
Please...

I would not do that to any living creature that I loved let alone a family member.
[right][snapback]68722[/snapback][/right]


I'm thinking if it's so humane that we ought to use it to kill condemned prisoners.

Nomarchy
QUOTE(Arturo_Vandelay @ Mar 23 2005, 03:05 PM)
I'm thinking if it's so humane that we ought to use it to kill condemned prisoners.
[right][snapback]68724[/snapback][/right]


who are in persistent vegetative states, I suppose.
Bee
QUOTE(Arturo_Vandelay @ Mar 23 2005, 06:05 PM)
I'm thinking if it's so humane that we ought to use it to kill condemned prisoners.
[right][snapback]68724[/snapback][/right]


Please.

Ignoring the alternative is much much worse, and that is something I would never subject anyone to--let alone anyone I love.

What exactly do you see as the alternatives here. Keeping her alive until the body rot progresses to the point that they have to inject her with embalming fluids? Her body is rotting, but you all know that, right?

That is what you are talking about here.

Don't be cowardly about it.
Mizilus
QUOTE(Arturo_Vandelay @ Mar 23 2005, 03:05 PM)
I'm thinking if it's so humane that we ought to use it to kill condemned prisoners.
[right][snapback]68724[/snapback][/right]



I simply dont get it at all.

I can understand "giving up" on a persons chances but there is a huge difference between pulling the plug and starving someone to death. Vegetable or no.

If she didnt want to live like this I'm sure she didnt mean that she wanted to be denied food and water and to slowly succumb to starvation/dehydration. Who in the f--k came up with this. It is so stupid and lopsided as to appear staged. I mean, what sides are there to this issue? The people who want her dead and the people that are fighting for her to live? I mean come on! The choices are so retardedly limited as to seem like a farce.
Arturo_Vandelay
QUOTE(Nomarchy @ Mar 23 2005, 04:08 PM)
who are in persistent vegetative states, I suppose.
[right][snapback]68725[/snapback][/right]


Hell no. We're just talking the time and means of death. Since we aren't going to review how we got here with Schiavo I figure it doesn't matter how inmates got to where they are.
Arturo_Vandelay
QUOTE(Mizilus @ Mar 23 2005, 04:10 PM)
I simply dont get it at all.

I can understand "giving up" on a  persons chances but there is a huge difference between pulling the plug and starving someone to death. Vegetable or no.

If she didnt want to live like this I'm sure she didnt mean that she wanted to be denied food and water and to slowly succumb to starvation/dehydration. Who in the f--k came up with this. It is so stupid and lopsided as to appear staged. I mean, what sides are there to this issue? The people who want her dead and the people that are fighting for her to live? I mean come on! The choices are so retardedly limited as to seem like a farce.
[right][snapback]68728[/snapback][/right]



The "bases" have driven the debate here. The right won't allow her to be put quickly and painlessly to sleep, and the left won't allow people who care for her to take over and give her a chance at survival. Don't even want a real review of her case.

I have this funny feeling from seeing a few people involved with her that she took a while to get to this awful place because her husband really didn't want her to recover. Nurses got fired by friends and a lawyer of his because they tried to do more than the minimum.

I'm by no means virulently pro-life, and realize the likely outcome isn't good for her, but as is it looks to me that some people want her dead NOW for political reasons, not because they really feel for her or her husband.

Bee
Yeah, having her die of body rot is soooo much more compassionate.

You can be realistic and make a hard choice here, or be a coward and say it all sucks.

It does all suck.

The woman's been through due process to the point of cruelty.

Yeah, I'm sure she'd want people to suck the spit out of her mouth every 20 minutes and have her diaper changed regularly.

Real human compassion y'all are showing.

Let's just blame it all on 'politics.'

sad.gif
Mizilus
QUOTE(Arturo_Vandelay @ Mar 23 2005, 03:18 PM)
The "bases" have driven the debate here. The right won't allow her to be put quickly and painlessly to sleep, and the left won't allow people who care for her to take over and give her a chance at survival. Don't even want a real review of her case.

I have this funny feeling from seeing a few people involved with her that she took a while to get to this awful place because her husband really didn't want her to recover. Nurses got fired by friends and a lawyer of his because they tried to do more than the minimum.

I'm by no means virulently pro-life, and realize the likely outcome isn't good for her, but as is it looks to me that some people want her dead NOW  for political reasons, not because they really feel for her or her husband.
[right][snapback]68736[/snapback][/right]



"and the left won't allow people who care for her to take over and give her a chance at survival"


I agree with your synopsis as to the "rights" position but I disagree with the assumption that "the left" dont want people to care for her and, in effect, want her to die. The again there is the "review of her case". Well gee, I guess you people can fish an issue out of nowhere just as well as you can fish an "opponents stance on the issue" out of nowhere. Thank God "the presidents" brother is governor of the state where this huge bunch of sh_t is happening.



"I have this funny feeling from seeing a few people involved with her that she took a while to get to this awful place because her husband really didn't want her to recover. Nurses got fired by friends and a lawyer of his because they tried to do more than the minimum."


Jesus Christ Arti, that is the worst of the hearsay. Sure and granted that that isnt any more hearsay than the fact that her husband says she didnt want to live like this, but it is worse.

Fine. None of that is admissable, then what?

"
I'm by no means virulently pro-life, and realize the likely outcome isn't good for her, but as is it looks to me that some people want her dead NOW for political reasons, not because they really feel for her or her husband."


Dude, the only reason this is political AT ALL FOR ANY REASON is beacuse repuslickans have made it so.

Well you know how I feel about repuslickans.




Arturo_Vandelay
QUOTE(Mizilus @ Mar 23 2005, 04:33 PM)


Well you know how I feel about repuslickans.
[right][snapback]68745[/snapback][/right]



Someday you should tell me about it.
Mizilus
Ok. Then you agree with me for once?
Arturo_Vandelay
I didn't read seriously between the "you folks" and the first appearance of "repuslicans".

If you want to rant, rant away. I'm not going to insert discussion into the rants.
Human Ills
QUOTE(Mizilus @ Mar 23 2005, 03:10 PM)
I simply dont get it at all.

I can understand "giving up" on a  persons chances but there is a huge difference between pulling the plug and starving someone to death. Vegetable or no.

If she didnt want to live like this I'm sure she didnt mean that she wanted to be denied food and water and to slowly succumb to starvation/dehydration. Who in the f--k came up with this. It is so stupid and lopsided as to appear staged. I mean, what sides are there to this issue? The people who want her dead and the people that are fighting for her to live? I mean come on! The choices are so retardedly limited as to seem like a farce.
[right][snapback]68728[/snapback][/right]

I don't think there is anything else to "pull" that will accelerate her death.
Mizilus
QUOTE(Arturo_Vandelay @ Mar 23 2005, 03:43 PM)
I didn't read seriously between the "you folks" and the first appearance of "repuslicans".

If you want to rant, rant away. I'm not going to insert discussion into the rants.
[right][snapback]68757[/snapback][/right]



Read between the lines arti. Even though I dont think I hide meanings or mince words. You know if you can trust me or not. Why doubt me on this? Where have I gone wrong?
Arturo_Vandelay
QUOTE(Mizilus @ Mar 23 2005, 04:47 PM)
Read between the lines arti. Even though I dont think I hide meanings or mince words.  You know if you can trust me or not. Why doubt me on this? Where have I gone wrong?
[right][snapback]68761[/snapback][/right]



By rewriting the same rant into every post, regardless of topic. If that's the way you feel fine, but if it's only Repuslicans we have no where to go in discussion anyway.
Mizilus
Repuslickans? It has probably been two months prior to today in which I used that pet term of mine. C'mon arti. Surely somone so adept as you can come up with a better defense/offense.
Bart Katz
QUOTE(Bee @ Mar 23 2005, 04:35 PM)
She will not starve. At one point the dehydration will cause major organ failure and she will pass. Doctors have said that it is a relatively "easy" death.

It's not as inhumane as RWers and the 'librul' media have painted it to be.

sad.gif
[right][snapback]68691[/snapback][/right]


Yes, that state of "euphoria" sets in. Oh wait, she can't feel anything anyway so what difference does it make?

You all pro death people should promote this as a new, more humane method for the death penalty.

In fact, to listen to the lefties tell it, Hitler did all those people a favor when he starved them in camps. They all died happy. Same goes for the starving children of Rawanda, Sudan, and those other places. They should all be thankful for such a humane death.
Human Ills
QUOTE(Mizilus @ Mar 23 2005, 03:58 PM)
Repuslickans? It has probably been two months prior to today in which I used that pet term of mine. C'mon arti. Surely somone so adept as you can come up with a better defense/offense.
[right][snapback]68764[/snapback][/right]

I don't really care for the way you discount the nurses' testimony out of hand. I didn't find everything she said unbelievable.
The entire defense to her charge? Oh, it's been gone over.
Since nothing was in writing, and all evidence that she said she wouldn't "want to live like that" comes from the husband, his friends and his family (unless I missed something), then I think it what she says has relevance.
davisął
QUOTE(Nomarchy @ Mar 23 2005, 11:55 AM)
Sure, but would they prefer to starve to death in order to not "be kept alive like that"?

Starving to death, although a very natural way to die, would not be at the top of most people's preferences, now, would it?
[right][snapback]68550[/snapback][/right]



That is what they said.
Nomarchy
QUOTE(Arturo_Vandelay @ Mar 23 2005, 03:11 PM)
Hell no. We're just talking the time and means of death. Since we aren't going to review how we got here with Schiavo  I figure it doesn't matter how inmates got to where they are.
[right][snapback]68729[/snapback][/right]


I don't follow.
Nomarchy
QUOTE(davisął @ Mar 23 2005, 05:00 PM)
That is what they said.
[right][snapback]68817[/snapback][/right]


Who's they? And they said it about whom?

I am farqing confused.
celtcahill
Legion

If you find it so offensive why not just a morphine OD ?

Legal in Holland, and this is why
Bart Katz
QUOTE(celtcahill @ Mar 23 2005, 07:33 PM)
Legion

If you find it so offensive why not just a morphine OD ?

Legal in Holland, and this is why
[right][snapback]68862[/snapback][/right]


It ain't legal in Fla, is it?
Human Ills
QUOTE(Bart Katz @ Mar 23 2005, 05:42 PM)
It ain't legal in Fla, is it?
[right][snapback]68877[/snapback][/right]

Well dang barto, if we are going by what's legal in Fla.



Well then, the case is closed.
Bart Katz
QUOTE(Human Ills @ Mar 23 2005, 07:51 PM)
Well dang barto, if we are going by what's legal in Fla.
Well then, the case is closed.
[right][snapback]68894[/snapback][/right]


Send Celtie to Holland then.
davisął
QUOTE(Human Ills @ Mar 23 2005, 07:51 PM)
Well dang barto, if we are going by what's legal in Fla.
Well then, the case is closed.
[right][snapback]68894[/snapback][/right]



indeed.
davisął
I'm for assisted suicide in limited circumstances too.

Bart Katz
QUOTE(davisął @ Mar 23 2005, 07:56 PM)
I'm for assisted suicide in limited circumstances too.
[right][snapback]68903[/snapback][/right]


woot woot
Arturo_Vandelay
QUOTE(Nomarchy @ Mar 23 2005, 06:29 PM)
I don't follow.
[right][snapback]68854[/snapback][/right]


If the death is all that matters, then why not for DP inmates?
lil bart
QUOTE(Mizilus @ Mar 23 2005, 03:10 PM)
I simply dont get it at all.

I can understand "giving up" on a  persons chances but there is a huge difference between pulling the plug and starving someone to death. Vegetable or no.

If she didnt want to live like this I'm sure she didnt mean that she wanted to be denied food and water and to slowly succumb to starvation/dehydration. Who in the f--k came up with this. It is so stupid and lopsided as to appear staged. I mean, what sides are there to this issue? The people who want her dead and the people that are fighting for her to live? I mean come on! The choices are so retardedly limited as to seem like a farce.
[right][snapback]68728[/snapback][/right]


She can't eat or drink. She can't think. She perceives almost nothing, makes sense of absolutely nothing, and carries nothing from one day to the next. What is the point to keeping her breathing?

The undignity is breathtaking to me. The quality of life impossible to go lower.

QUOTE(Arturo_Vandelay @ Mar 23 2005, 03:18 PM)
The "bases" have driven the debate here. The right won't allow her to be put quickly and painlessly to sleep, and the left won't allow people who care for her to take over and give her a chance at survival. Don't even want a real review of her case.

I have this funny feeling from seeing a few people involved with her that she took a while to get to this awful place because her husband really didn't want her to recover. Nurses got fired by friends and a lawyer of his because they tried to do more than the minimum.

I'm by no means virulently pro-life, and realize the likely outcome isn't good for her, but as is it looks to me that some people want her dead NOW  for political reasons, not because they really feel for her or her husband.
[right][snapback]68736[/snapback][/right]


Nurses, plural? I have read of one, not to my view credible at all. Many courts, many judges and a court-appointed guardian have taken years to evaluate this degenerating unlife.


QUOTE(Human Ills @ Mar 23 2005, 04:17 PM)
I don't really care for the way you discount the nurses' testimony out of hand. I didn't find everything she said unbelievable.
The entire defense to her charge? Oh, it's been gone over.
Since nothing was in writing, and all evidence that she said she wouldn't "want to live like that" comes from the husband, his friends and his family (unless I missed something), then I think it what she says has relevance.
[right][snapback]68771[/snapback][/right]



Why not the court guardian instead of the nurse? Have you listened to what this person did and has said?
Arturo_Vandelay
QUOTE(lil bart @ Mar 23 2005, 08:58 PM)

Nurses, plural? I have read of one, not to my view credible at all. Many courts, many judges and a court-appointed guardian have taken years to evaluate this degenerating unlife.

[right][snapback]69017[/snapback][/right]


Yep, I've heard two separate nurses and a doctor that spent a whole day, and says the most others had done was 45 minutes. I don't know who/what is credible, but I'd want at LEAST some current tests. The reason I'm against the DP is there are mistakes made in the court system. And she is surely not guilty of anything.
lil bart
QUOTE(Arturo_Vandelay @ Mar 23 2005, 08:03 PM)
Yep, I've heard two separate nurses and a doctor that spent a whole day, and says the most others had done was 45 minutes. I don't know who/what is credible, but I'd want at LEAST some current tests. The reason I'm against the DP is there are mistakes made in the court system. And she is surely not guilty of anything.
[right][snapback]69019[/snapback][/right]


Let me make perfectly clear I do not support the death penalty ever, for anyone. I also do not think we can prevent everyone from dying .... or should.
Arturo_Vandelay
QUOTE(lil bart @ Mar 23 2005, 09:06 PM)
I also do not think we can prevent everyone from dying .... or should.
[right][snapback]69020[/snapback][/right]


Yet we all pick our battles. This is one case where I have changed some the more I hear. Usually that isn't true.
Human Ills
QUOTE(Arturo_Vandelay @ Mar 23 2005, 08:17 PM)
This is one case where I have changed some the more I hear. Usually that isn't true.
[right][snapback]69025[/snapback][/right]

yes.
Bee
user posted image
lil bart
QUOTE(lil bart @ Mar 23 2005, 08:06 PM)
Let me make perfectly clear I do not support the death penalty ever, for anyone. I also do not think we can prevent everyone from dying .... or should.
[right][snapback]69020[/snapback][/right]


This is a painful and inadequate position. As Celtie gently alluded to yesterday (not so like him, those gentle allusions ... cool.gif ), in some countries a heavy dose of painkiller would quicken the process. There is something grotesque about "allowing" someone to "naturally" die of starvation and thirst, even if we are almost positive she cannot feel it. Almost positive. Almost positive.

If we were wholly positive, residual discomfiture would still lap against the horror of treading into manmade death.

There is just no good answer; that's the only answer I am wholly sure about.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2009 Invision Power Services, Inc.