OK, I am taking a lot of flak, as resident ideologue within the circle of friends I have come to know over the years, on the Terry Schiavo case. Principled and emotional postions taken by Republicans are yet more examples of right-wing hypocrisy. Every moral and political brick in the foundation of conservatism is now painted with Schiavoism. Federalism, limited government, and soon, I'm sure, the War on Terror, can no longer be carried into political campaigns as standards of the Grand Old Party.
No. We let ourselves get taken with a single, tragic case, one of thousands in the country alone, I'm sure. I am surprised, though, that the liberals have yet to find a connection between the Schiavo's parents, Haliburton and, of course Dick Cheney. Why else would the Republicans so passionately take up the cause at the highest levels of government? C'mon you guys...there must be something...wait, isn't Terry Schiavo starving in a hospital in Florida? And isn't the Governor of Florida George Bush's brother? Aaa Ha!
Well, I don't see a need to explain or justify or some how square the actions of a great many Republicans in and out of Congress with the principles of the conservative ideal of government. I don't therefore see the contradictions and hypocrisy, blindingly visible to liberals, in men and women expressing their faith on behalf of the poor soul and her family. Keeping to their faith, might not these Republican hypocrites affect a thousand other similar plights?
Is there not room or a need for political action to guide us in future similar circumstances? It is obvious to me, that the mere fact of this case going from State to Federal courts and back again that there might be some ambiguity in the current law. This requires us to debate the issue and, if necessary, make law.
But no. Let us instead heckle the Republicans for daring to defend their faith and one who cannot possibly defend herself. The Democrats all but one, I believe, stayed away from the Congressional debate. Unusual for the great gas bags of the world, the party of the little people, the common man, of the oppressed, downtrodden, homeless, helpless, etc.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Mike, I cannot let your words lie as they are, unchallenged. However, my rebuttal is the opposite of what you expect. I am not out to yell and scream about this particular case, or others like hers. I have no issue with you or anyone else about this case. As far as I am concerned, this case, along with the thousands of other cases where people are taken off live support (with their intentions on paper or not), is best left to the family. I certainly do not want the government deciding whether I will live or die in the situation she was in. However in this case, there were divisions among the family--that is proof that we should forgive and forget and love one another. Otherwise, we are left with a tradegy like this one.
As the Bible states--once one marries, they clave onto the betrothed, and the birth family shrinks from their lives. Hence the role the husband had over the family--biblically, if nothing else. Other than that, I have no clue, (biblical or otherwise ) or desire to express one in this case, or any other like it. I've witnessed too many deaths in my immediate family. Death is always hard, no matter how it happens.
I give my prayers and best wishes to the Shaivo family.
As far as politics, hell, you right-to-lifers on the right wing have the political football there--are you planning a field goal attempt, or are you planning to punt?
Life is short and precious and should never be a political football.
just my view-barb
PS. I do not ever espouse the idea of Republican hypocrites. Us democrates certainly have had our share of live and learn. I don't wish to continue this diversive stance on life. I believe we are all pro-life. I do not wish at this point to give credence to the idea that all democrats are pro-choice, because we are not. I am not. End of my story.
Barb
Post a Comment