Shame on You
 

I thought Fringy's comment was the funniest thing I had heard in a month. But your response may have topped it. Two Gold Stars.

Shame on You
 

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Them's fightin' words, spankme.

Shame on You
 

Absolutely. But there is a difference between discussing the hard choices and trying to use the government to substitute your decision for (here) the husband's. Families work through these problems all the time. What makes this case unique is the way that the parents have mobilized political support to try to change things when the usual resolution did not please them. It's one thing to question pulling the tube. It's quite another to line up politicians to pass laws to overrule the judge who decided the tube should be pulled.

Shame on You
 

To feel this way, you have to ignore that her husband thinks she would have wanted the tube to be pulled in these circumstances. You are sacrificing her interests, and his, for those of the parents.

Give me a break. Democrats did not make this a statewide or national political issue. Republicans did. Bill Frist is running for President. Tom DeLay is running from his ethical problems. We all know what's going on here, and the fact that some Dems voted the way they did is not particularly material. They can answer for their votes, but the GOP has to answer for exploiting the tragedy and foisting it on the national stage.

Shame on You
 

I thought it was Nixon who had the Southern Strategy and then Reagan who perfected it. Why is Bill Clinton at fault? As a loyal Republican, I think we have to take the blame for this one.

Shame on You
 

Bilmore, this is a serious question. Do you think that Terri's wishes about this issue are irrelevant? Or do you take the position that no one really knows what her wishes are?

Because it sounds to me that you are saying that her wishes should be disregarded to mollify her parents, since -- at worst -- she is now a vegetable, and therefore it doesn't matter to her that she is being kept alive in such a state.

Shame on You
 

This is the funniest thing I have heard in a month! Two Gold Stars.

Shame on You
 

I would have thought someone here or on the FB would have been tasteless enough to remind us all of Uma Thurman's coma in Kill Bill, vol. 1. But no.

Coming soon ... after Easter ...

http://www.lequotidienducinema.com/g..._galerie/1.jpg
Terry Schiavo is back, and she's looking for the Democrats who wanted her to die....

Shame on You
 

As a historical matter, most evangelical Christians were apolitical until the late 70s and early 80s. Many were excited about Carter's election (because of his religion) and then disappointed by his actions in office, and then were mobilized on the Republican side by Reagan.

Shame on You
 

I said "may" have topped it............you just want all the glory for yourself. Just can't share the limelight.

Shame on You
 

not with the extinct, no.

Shame on You
 

You should have quit while you where ahead. The committee has stripped you of your gold star.

Shame on You
 

Oy--it was a response to Greedy's glorification of Clinton. While the evangelicals certainly were a force well before the blue dress, his conduct in office certainly reenergized the "moral majority".

Shame on You
 

If you are a resurgence of any past committee, I don't want your gold star, dear.

I don't remember whether it was you or club who turned in your R party card, but whichever of you did is now eligible to spank me, though.

Shame on You
 

Nixon's Southern Strategy was mostly about race rather than religion. I think we started to see religion become more of a motivating factor in the Southern Strategy during the 80s, after Nixon was gone (didn't Ford concede most of the South running against Carter?), and at first I think it was a partial proxy for race (I don't know how the Bakke decision became an issue for evangelists to rally around, but they did).

I can say I'd rather see the nation divided over religion than over race.

Shame on You
 

Funniest post in awhile. Plus, it has the added dimension of Ty using the "i would have thought you guys would stoop to" vehicle, which is a nice touch.

Shame on You
 

I think you're glorifying the Clinton haters if you let them dress up their objections in religion. There has been no shortage of either Rs or conservative Christian zealots who have had their own little sex scandals.

The substantive religious issues that created the bigger split are abortion and gay rights. I think women's role in general fits in there, too, though I think there is more internal conflict within the Christian conservatives over that (though boy, they hate Hillary for absolutely no good reason other than that she's a strong woman).

Shame on You
 

This may, in fact, be key to my view of the matter. Sushi doesn't have interests. Any "dignity" or "wishes" kinds of interests all reside in the survivors who hold those interests dear, or not.

No win situation
 

Not that my opinion is worth anything, but all this Terry Shiavo thing has reminded me why I would rather have my fingernailspulled out rather than become a judge or elected to office. This situation has no easy way out.

1) If she did not want to be left in this state you are inclined to let her die

2) In addition, I would never want to be left as a vegetable

3) but, if you are going to let her die: starve or dehydrate her to death? That just seems ridiculous.

4) it would seem more humane, if you are going to let her die, to pump her full of morphine and give her an overdoes. I know doctors said she won't feel it, but even if there is a slight chance she will, that is just unbelievably cruel.

5) but giving her an overdose would be murder. So you can't do that

6) on the other hand, if her parents want her alive, who does it hurt to keep her on life support

7) But then again if this is not what she wanted, we have to support her wishes - in this country you are supposed to have a right over your own body.........

8) However, it is illegal to allow someone to commit suicide for what I hope are obvious reasons........

9) If the state pays to keep her alive, these are valuable resources that could be used to save other lives or to cure some diseases..............

10) But once you start deciding it is OK to kill someone so that others may have a better life - well we know where that leads.....

This whole thing sucks, and I am just glad I am not one of these people having to make the tough decision. I think there are good, well intentioned people on all sides of this, its just a catch 22 that totally sucks. So I am going to get drunk and forget about it. It is a Republic and that is why I pay judges and politicians to lose sleep over this.

Shame on You
 

I think they approach irrelevancy due to her vegatative qualities, in relation to the interests of the living.

Shame on You
 

Club - she is all yours - I am, fortunately or unfortunately, still a card carrying member of the GOP.

Shame on You
 

I've always admired how you can score points in your own mind, facts be damned, sort of like the ability to will yourself into an orgasm.

Shame on You
 

Then why on earth does it matter whether she signed a paper, as I thought you were suggesting a day or two ago?

Shame on You
 

And on that note, on to see if I can break my other arm on the bumps.

Shame on You
 

If it ends up giving the survivors direction, and makes conflict less likely amongst them, it's wonderful.

For the survivors. It's all about them.

Shame on You
 

I think you're confusing me with other posters again, bilmore.

[Hank]
[gwinky]


If you don't appreciate my use of callback humor, try Ty's more articulate answer to your question.

If you truly believe that this was a bipartisan Congressional effort -- beyond the literal counting of Democratic votes for it -- then obviously (a) you've been watching Democratic congressmen wax on the Senate and House floor at length over Terri, where I have not, and (b) your interpretetation the GOP "talking points" to be an encouragement of a bipartisan solution, instead of sticking it to the Democrats for the mid-terms, and energizing one's base, is one that I've missed.

Shame on You
 

So her wishes only matter if the survivors prefer to be bound by her wishes instead of what they want? It makes sense in a LSAT-logic-problem sort of way, but only in that way.

Shame on You
 

Then they should all be called "Health Care Letters of Intent."

Shame on You
 

So the estate tax should be OK, because it doesn't matter what the decedent wanted.

Shame on You
 

You can have the gold star, just for this.

Asmussen Rules
 

Asmussen Rules
 

Are you going to happy hour?

If so where?

Shame on You
 

They hate Hillary because she tried to take on substantive tasks without being elected to office or approved by the Senate. She was an obnoxious usurper with an attitude that just happended to be a woman. The strong part had nothing to do with it.

Shame on You
 

I am too, as of today, but I am seriously considering giving it up.

Shame on You
 

Here ya go.

In Item 7, write "no party."

Shame on You
 

Thanks. I can't remember, is CA an open primary state?

Shame on You
 

I'm sure you know this, but spanking me is not required if you leave the party. I would not want to provide a disincentive.

Shame on You
 

Decency? I am surprised that no one thinks that the parents position is completely reprehensible and indecent (other than me and Mr. Schiavo, I guess). I absolutely disagree that this is a case where, if the husband gets his way it does devastating emotional harm to her parents while, if they get their way, it does him no similar harm, he might at worst suffer a case of violated abstract legal rights. Frankly, I think what the parents want to subject him to is particularly horrific for someone who cares about her.

Effectively, the "let her die" argument is that she is already, in all meaningful human ways, dead. So continuing to artificially maintain her (non-congnitive) functions is amazingly ghoulish. I, for one, would be entirely willing to spend years in court if someone effectively took my husband's dead body, mechanically and artificially caused it to maintain some of the traits of "life" and kept him around, dressing his dead body up, combing his hair, video taping themselves deludedly play-acting with his undead body and pretending he's responding to them. My God, what could be worse than that? [Oh, yeah, editing the tapes and sending them to the press, that would be still worse. Waive to the camera, darling! (flop, flop, flop.)] If I were in his shoes, I couldn't be any more horrified if her parents were trying to have her dead body stuffed so they could stick her in their front hall to greet guests.

Honestly, when I think about this case, I think "damn, zombies are scary, but this woman isn't even as "alive" as your standard movie zombie. Not even the old, slow ones from the '70s." (Yeah, I know, my obsession with horror movies again - but then, the ability to bring out extremely suppressed taboos and emotions like this for conscious consideration is one of the reasons I like them.) The reason (OK, one of the reasons) zombies are scary is that they are your friends, family and neighbors - but they aren't, and the fact that their bodies are going on without them, when they're really dead, is particularly, personally horrifying.

Anyway, happy Easter all - maybe in a couple of days they'll go to visit and she'll stand amidst them and say "Why are ye troubled?"

Shame on You
 

That is so hot.

Oh, sorry -- wrong board.

Shame on You
 

That explains a lot.

S_A_M :D