Shame on You
 

Duly noted. Some conservatives. Your cultural conservatives, say, but not your libertarians.

Shame on You
 

I really feel badly for Michael Schiavo, who has been thrust onto the national stage by other people and trashed repeatedly. He didn't ask for this.

And I think the people who are exploiting this in the worst way are not Republicans per se, although their interests are aligned with the GOP right now and a quite a few GOP politicians are rushing to curry favor with them. The most fervid cultural conservatives have a commitment to their groups -- e.g., pro-life groups -- that transcends their relationship with the party. So, if you read my message carefully, you'd have seen that I said that "Tom DeLay's new pals" were doing the ass-fucking, and that I did not attribute it to the GOP. You drew that inference yourself. DeLay himself didn't really jump on the bandwagon until a few days ago.

Shame on You
 

What part of "nobody is saying he shouldn't have moved on" didn't you hear? The laughable part is your theory that anyone criticizing the decisions in this case is not respecting the "sanctity" of this marriage? You sound silly talking about the sanctity of a marriage where the man has a new wife and kids. Stop this nonsense. Also, I have heard a billion angles to this debate IRL and everyone seems thoughtful, passionate and genuine about their beliefs. Therefore, I am also adding that your "pro-Schiavo is a right wing conspiracy" is Stoopid.

Shame on You
 

And not even your federalist conservatives, or your main-stream conservatives. You're right about whom the R party is currently currying favor. But they've pissed off a fair number of mainstream (and not just moderate) Rs in the process.

NY Times had a vaguely enlightening article on the point a couple of days ago.

Shame on You
 

A lot of people are saying he shouldn't move on, including many of the people who talk out of their ass about the sanctity of marriage. If you're not one of them, I think that's excellent -- good job! -- but they're still out there, even if very few of them haunt this board.

If Terry Schiavo said to Michael Schiavo, "honey, if I'm ever a vegetable, I want you to find someone else instead of falling into a twisted relationship with my parents," respecting the sanctity of their marriage means respecting his decision. When these people talk about the sanctity of marriage, what they really mean is, the sanctity of what we say a marriage is like.

Who said anything about the right wing or a conspiracy? I just said that these people are not respecting Michael Schiavo's relationship with his wife -- his marriage -- and that what they really want is to tell the rest of us how to live our lives. It's not a conspiracy -- if you listen to the right radio stations, they're pretty happy to tell you all about it.

Shame on You
 

The Ad Litem report says that her family encouraged him to seek other relationships in those initial years while he was still married to her.

Shame on You
 

There comes a time when your "federalist" conservatives and your "mainstream" conservatives need to stop just being "pissed off" about what their elected officials are doing. It's getting tired. I bet the same people are "pissed off" -- or maybe just a little "concerned" -- that Congress sees no need to find a balance between spending and revenue. And yet it just goes on and on. You guys elected these folks -- at some point, you've got to admit that their actions -- and not an occasional letter to the editors of the WSK or the Weekly Standard -- define conservatism.

Shame on You
 

Cite please. I have yet to hear anyone say "I cannot believe he started dating again; it's only been fifteen years since she's been vegetable, fer Chrissakes". Where DO you GET this stuff, Ty? It's his new wife and kids AND the fact that he is still the guardian of his brain dead wife that some people are uncomfortable with and I have heard and respected the views of those who have noted this arrangement as one of many good points in this case

If you are listening to radio stations that are broadcasting shock and horror over a man's dating outside a 15 year marriage with a veggie, then you're listening to the wrong ratio stations. Or, those aren't radios you are listening to, but the voices in your head again.

Shame on You
 

Untrue, Ty.

Remember, the DeLays of the world merely provide useful PR for Democrats. They're not at risk of actually doing anything, like implementing policy defined by their party platform, that would define what conservatism is, or offend those inside the Big Tent.

Shame on You
 

In fairness, Bilmore, I have never called Tom Delay stupid. I also doubt he's an ass-fucker. (With a rug like that, he could never get a date.)

S_A_M

Shame on You
 

Last I heard, in order to not be married anymore you have to either get divorced or one of the parties has to die. Neither has happened in this case, and in fact that Catholic religion of hers that they keep citing would prevent divorce. There are thousands of marriage arrangements out there and I know a lot of Catholics in holding pattern relationships waiting for a (non persistent vegetative state) spouse to die before tying the knot. There has been NO evidence that the marital bonds in this case have been broken, notwithstanding other relationships.

Shame on You
 

Diane --

You're in NYC aren't you? Not many cultural conservatives up there -- especially of the wing-nut variety. I think there are some themes to this debate that you've missed hearing.

Note, for example, that the pleading filed earlier this week by the Schindler family in the M.D. Fla stated Schiavo "abandoned his marriage" in 1995 -- with the subtext that this made him unfit to continue to be her guardian. The statement is true to some extent, but the language used and the way it was use surely expressed disapproval.

S_A_M

Shame on You
 

I'm comfortable with motherfucking jackass.

Shame on You
 

He's your senator. You get a pass.

ETA - representative. leader. guru. whatever.

Shame on You
 

What's the problem with him having this relationship and being the guardian of his brain-dead wife? It sounds to me that you have a particular idea of what his marriage vows entailed. Maybe this is what Terry Schiavo would have wanted. Who are you to say?

I'm paying as little attention to this crap as I can, although my Dad just called me to see if Sen. Frist can be challenged for the improper practice of medicine or something.

Shame on You
 

Who said the marriage had been broken? Who is disputing that the marriage is intact? The point is that not everyone who views the situation as a potential conflict is disrespecting the sanctity of the marriage. After 15 years and two kids with a new woman, how DARE anyone take that into account when voicing their opinion on the issue. No conflict of interest would even be possible here, right, because the marriage wasn't dissolved in a divorce? Anyone who questions whether the new arrangement is unduly coloring the decision is retarded?

Shame on You
 

What the hell is wrong with being an ass-fucker, as long as the ass-fuckee is willing?

You people.

Shame on You
 

I don't think Michael Schiavo was willing.

Shame on You
 

She's brain dead. What's the potential conflict? You could always suggest that he'd just like to pull the plug so he can get on with his life -- the fact that he's found someone else doesn't change this. But the fact that he and Terry Schiavo were married means that if you truly respect the sanctity of their relationship, then you trust him to make the right decision by her. If you want to second-guess him and tell him how to live, you can do that, but don't pretend it's anything other than religious conservatives hijacking the government to foist their own beliefs on the rest of us.

Shame on You
 

Besides me? No.

No. I've heard them all. I've also heard where everyone was and what they were doing when JFK senior died. And how they learned of the WTC attacks. Fascinating stuff. Only thing better is hearing about people's dreams.

The Schindlers were okay with him dating and in fact they met and liked the new woman. Things have blown up now for obvious reasons so I wouldn't read too much subtext. I don't think the Schindler's issue is that Michael is with a new woman. They want him removed as guardian and don't want their daughter's tube removed. Shit. Even the veggie's parents were okay with the guy fucking someone else. Like I said, I'm not going to attack someone for questioning his role as guardian. For some people, like RT - it's really simple: box asks married; box is checked. box asks if courts have decided issue of what she wanted; box is checked. Case over. For anyone who dares to still question these things, I think that's okay and disagree that this case is so easy.

Shame on You
 

We learned the lesson of the democratic party in the late 70s/early 80s.

Although maybe the lesson is: southern christian conservatives: can't live with 'em, can't win without 'em.

Shame on You
 

I don't want to tell him how to live. But yes, Ty, I would like to second-guess this crisis and not just check the box. But no, I would not like to hijack the government. Watch it now. A boy could get arrested talking like that on the Internet.

Shame on You
 

Well, no. I vote for whom I vote for, not because they are part of a party or group or movement, but because their views coincide with mine in areas I consider important. Frankly, in the grand scheme of things, that the people who got Iraq right are fucking up on the Schiavo saga leaves them, still, the best choice. For me.

Shame on You
 

Don't pretend that you have any respect for his marriage then, or the institution of marriage. That's all I ask.

Shame on You
 

I was just curious - do strawmen bounce?

Shame on You
 

It's like y'all are happy to take credit for putting on a great fireworks show, but don't want any responsibility for the noise.

Shame on You
 

Anyone who's ever read the FB knows that I like to check the box.

:rolleyes:

Shame on You
 

This is about who gets to decide what Terry Schiavo would have wanted -- her husband, or a bunch of Republican elected officials. If you're going to use the government's power to intrude on and overrule the relationship that man has with his wife, don't pretend that you think marriage is a special thing. I'm just asking for a little honesty -- it shouldn't be that hard.

And we know that you're with the angels on the gay marriage thing, so it's not even like you're with the people I'm complaining about. So why defend them?

Oh, yeah, it's Friday.

Shame on You
 

During one term of Jimmy Carter and then during Ronald Reagan?

You learned nothing during the 90s, when Bill Clinton showed y'all how a country should be run?

Shame on You
 

Mmmmm, box-checking. Go over there and post about it, and get more bj posts too. Someone may get lucky tonight.

Shame on You
 

Love your word choice. Parents have been begging the courts for years to please let them take care of their kid, saying that hubby wasn't doing what he should. Courts kept saying, no, go away, he's acting in her best interests. They keep trying. Nope. Now, hubby says, kill her, it's time. Parents STILL say, let us take care of her, please. Courts say, nope, hubby's her boss, not you. Go away while we kill your daughter.

I'm not arguing that she's coming back, nor that the fed action was right. Just that this has been a horrid example of merciless proper procedure over humanity.

And you leave the parents right out of your either/or choice.

(And seemingly forget that almost 50% of the Dems who voted, voted for the bill, too.)

Shame on You
 

In fairness, Bill Clinton is to blame for the rise of the evangelicals.

Shame on You
 

In fairness, Monica is to blame for the rise of . . .

Naw, too cheap.

Shame on You
 

I've checked out a few boxes in me days, myself thank you. :yum: Still got me a sanctified marriage though.

Ronnie talk to Russia
 

What?!?!?!?!

Ever hear of Jerry Falwell and an organization called The Moral Majority? The evangelicals were kind of significant in the 1980 election. Not just in bouncing Jimmy Carter, but also in bouncing a bunch of longstanding Democratic senators, and making Howard Baker majority leader for a few years.

One could even argue that they helped Barry Goldwater seize control (temporarily) of the GOP in 1964.

(uh, am I whiffing?)

Ronnie talk to Russia
 

Well, now we're back to where I was before Greedy interrupted with his bimbo eruption.

Shame on You
 

There are no good choices for her -- death, or lingering in a vegetative state. Reasonable people can differ about which they'd choose, but reasonable people admit that it's a tough choice. By denigrating the moral choice that Michael Schiavo has made to, "kill her," you make clear how reasonable you are about it. It's not just a question of process. It's not a question of procedure over humanity. Many of us look at what the parents have done and have a hard time seeing it as humane. I have a hard time criticizing them, since they've lost and are again losing a daughter. So I'll save my criticism for all of those looking to score cheap points out of their tragedy.

I left the parents out because a respect for the sanctity of marriage means more than lip service -- it means that the husband has rights the parents don't. I also left out her friends and other relatives. They are surely hurt by what's happening to her, but that doesn't mean they get to substitute their beliefs for her husbands, either.

I can imagine a situation in which Schiavo's parents wanted to let her die, and her husband didn't, and the cultural conservatives side with him and trashed them. They don't care about the marriage here -- other things are more important.

And I haven't forgotten the Dems who voted for the bill. What do you want me to say about them?

Shame on You
 

Love your word choice too, bucko.

Shame on You
 

Ty, do you or do you not, agree that this Schiavo case rightfully raises issues in the minds of reasonable persons? Cause I can see good points made on both sides of the issue. If you think anyone who goes beyond "she is married and husband is guardian" is a crazy wingnut, then fine. But if you don't, why not go ahead and tell us what YOU believe are reasonable points that reasonable minds could make on the side of "I question or am against the pulling of the tube."

Shame on You
 

I'm speaking of what this is doing to her parents. After spending years fighting them for control, he couldn't have the decency to relinquish that control when he decides there's no hope, to someone who does? Like he's protecting her from some pain, when all admit, and he advocates, that she can feel none? They're first told that they need to stay out of it because he's doing everything, and then to stay out of it because he's in charge? No, I'm not reasonable about this. This court outcome sucks, and not for any "legal" reason.

Exactly right.

"About them"? Nothing. But maybe acknowledge, throughout your anti-Repub diatribes in this saga, the fact that it appears bipartisan.