Liberty Just in Case

A Dialogue for the September 12th World

Archive for March, 2005

What are we supposed to do?…

Posted by zaphriel on March 31, 2005

Tell them to have fun and cross your fingers?

Reason # 513 Why I became a Conservative:
The vocal minority ( “organizations ranging from the American Civil Liberties Union to gay rights groups”) is out of control.
I know I am going to lose most of the “Vocals” in my first paragraph, but here goes anyway.
They actually have a beef with a government website that says “abstinence is the healthiest choice.” Do they now have a problem with the truth? It is absolutely true that the best way to avoid disease and pregnancy IS abstinence. But I guess they’d rather we taught them the right way to relax and take it in the back door.
Shut-up you parentally absent and morally bankrupt social minority, and stop insisting on telling us that your way of life is alright and the mere mention of normalcy is offensive to your ears. Guess what, your parents were hetero, as a matter of fact if it weren’t for heteros, you wouldn’t exist. Get over yourselves and your “right to not be offended”.

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments »

The Pope…

Posted by zaphriel on March 31, 2005

It seems that the pope is on his final days.
It will be a sad day when he dies, he has been the best protagonist for Christianity in my lifetime. He has truly tried, with partial success, to reunite the Christian Church and to make amends for the past indiscretions of the Catholic Church. I certainly hope that the next pope is as progressive as this one, and John Paul II’s legacy lives on for centuries to come.
Good Journey, Padre.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

Terri Shaivo…

Posted by zaphriel on March 31, 2005

May she finally rest in peace.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

False But Accurate? The MSM Blows It Again

Posted by Mark on March 31, 2005

The breathless reports of a memo being circulated by and to Republican Senators and Representatives proving they had political motives and really didn’t care about Terri Schiavo appears to be a hoax. And we thought Dan Rather retired….

Here’s the link to the Weekly Standard article referred to by Howard Kurtz.

Posted in War and Terror | Leave a Comment »

False But Accurate? The MSM Blows It Again

Posted by Mark on March 30, 2005

The breathless reports of a memo being circulated by and to Republican Senators and Representatives proving they had political motives and really didn’t care about Terri Schiavo appears to be a hoax. And we thought Dan Rather retired….

Here’s the link to the Weekly Standard article referred to by Howard Kurtz.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

A Culture of Death: Disability Rights

Posted by Mark on March 30, 2005

This editorial puts the Schiavo controversy in its proper perspective:

The fundamental issue in Terri’s case is disability rights — not the right to die. Throughout all the extensive media coverage of the case, there has been only slight mention, but usually none at all, that nearly every major disability-rights organization has filed legal briefs to prevent what they and I regard as judicial murder. The protests are not only from pro-lifers and the Christian Right.

This makes more sense than anything else I’ve read on this issue.

Posted in War and Terror | Leave a Comment »

Bush and Babies

Posted by Mark on March 30, 2005

Sigh.
I sincerely wish folks on the Left would read laws and the history behind them before screaming one version or another of “Bush lied, people died!”

In this case, the Left is screaming that Bush killed a baby this time, and on top of that, was inconsistent in signing the Schiavo law. Here’s a Google Search of the Words Bush, Right to Die and Texas. The caterwauling can give one a headache.

Read the Texas law Bush signed. You can find it here.
The key part the Democrats are so incensed about is:
§ 166.046. PROCEDURE IF NOT EFFECTUATING A DIRECTIVE OR
TREATMENT DECISION.

Look at the hoops that have to be jumped through before a physician can go against the guardian’s wishes.

One more thing: This case was just decided Feb. 15th 2005, six years after Bush left the Texas governorship. Here’s what the Right to Life groups in Texas are saying:

The 1999 state law Mr. Bush signed allows hospitals to disconnect patients if the doctor and a hospital ethics committee agree it’s appropriate. But in a nod to right-to-life groups, the law requires hospitals to give families 10 days to find another institution to provide care.

“We considered that a big victory,” said Mr. Pojman, of the Texas Alliance for Life.

Mr. Hooser agreed that it was a win for right-to-life lobbyists, who were at the table because Mr. Bush vetoed a 1997 version of the bill. He vetoed that piece of legislation – drafted without right-to-life groups’ participation – “on the basis that it was pro-assisted suicide,” Mr. Hooser said.

The Schiavo case differs from that of baby Sun Hudson, cited by Ms. Schultz, and another recent Houston case, that of 68-year-old Spiro Nikolouzos. They both required a breathing machine. Ms. Schiavo can breathe but can’t eat or drink unassisted.

In the case of the Hudson baby, born with a fatal birth defect, the Texas law signed by Mr. Bush was followed when Texas Children’s Hospital unplugged him after several months of delays and repeated court battles. He died after the ventilator tube was removed last week.

In the case of Mr. Nikolouzos, his family found alternate care, and he was transferred Sunday from St. Luke’s Episcopal Hospital to a San Antonio nursing home. An invalid since 2001 after bleeding in his brain, he fell into what doctors called a hopeless condition recently.

The 1999 Texas law was an effort to clarify and simplify previous law on end-of-life issues, previously covered in a disjointed series of statutes.

Here’s what the hospital said regarding the removal of the ventilator:

“From the time Sun was born … he was on life support because his chest cavity and lungs could not grow and develop the capacity to support his body. He was slowly suffocating to death,” Texas Children’s said in a statement today.

Texas Children’s contended that continuing care for Sun was medically inappropriate, prolonged suffering and violated physician ethics. Hudson argued her son just needed more time to grow and be weaned from the ventilator.

You’ll find the rest of that story here. The Houston Chronicle placed the above quote toward the bottom of the story, where few would read it. They worked hard to present this case in as bad a light as possible for President Bush, but you can still see the real story if you read between the lines. The hospital called 40 other facilities, none of which would take this baby just to watch him slowly suffocate to death. I happen to know a thing or two about slow suffocation. It’s not a pleasant way to die, especially over several months. The tragedy is not lost on me. This mother’s frantic clinging to a life blinded her to the fact that there was no hope, and to the extreme suffering of this infant.

One more thing: Most, though by no means all, of those screaming the loudest about this baby’s death are the same ones who would have screamed for the right to kill it seven months earlier. Inconsistency, anyone?

Posted in War and Terror | Leave a Comment »

A Culture of Death: Disability Rights

Posted by Mark on March 29, 2005

This editorial puts the Schiavo controversy in its proper perspective:

The fundamental issue in Terri’s case is disability rights — not the right to die. Throughout all the extensive media coverage of the case, there has been only slight mention, but usually none at all, that nearly every major disability-rights organization has filed legal briefs to prevent what they and I regard as judicial murder. The protests are not only from pro-lifers and the Christian Right.

This makes more sense than anything else I’ve read on this issue.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

Bush and Babies

Posted by Mark on March 29, 2005

Sigh.
I sincerely wish folks on the Left would read laws and the history behind them before screaming one version or another of “Bush lied, people died!”

In this case, the Left is screaming that Bush killed a baby this time, and on top of that, was inconsistent in signing the Schiavo law. Here’s a Google Search of the Words Bush, Right to Die and Texas. The caterwauling can give one a headache.

Read the Texas law Bush signed. You can find it here.
The key part the Democrats are so incensed about is:
� 166.046. PROCEDURE IF NOT EFFECTUATING A DIRECTIVE OR
TREATMENT DECISION.

Look at the hoops that have to be jumped through before a physician can go against the guardian’s wishes.

One more thing: This case was just decided Feb. 15th 2005, six years after Bush left the Texas governorship. Here’s what the Right to Life groups in Texas are saying:

The 1999 state law Mr. Bush signed allows hospitals to disconnect patients if the doctor and a hospital ethics committee agree it’s appropriate. But in a nod to right-to-life groups, the law requires hospitals to give families 10 days to find another institution to provide care.

“We considered that a big victory,” said Mr. Pojman, of the Texas Alliance for Life.

Mr. Hooser agreed that it was a win for right-to-life lobbyists, who were at the table because Mr. Bush vetoed a 1997 version of the bill. He vetoed that piece of legislation � drafted without right-to-life groups’ participation � “on the basis that it was pro-assisted suicide,” Mr. Hooser said.

The Schiavo case differs from that of baby Sun Hudson, cited by Ms. Schultz, and another recent Houston case, that of 68-year-old Spiro Nikolouzos. They both required a breathing machine. Ms. Schiavo can breathe but can’t eat or drink unassisted.

In the case of the Hudson baby, born with a fatal birth defect, the Texas law signed by Mr. Bush was followed when Texas Children’s Hospital unplugged him after several months of delays and repeated court battles. He died after the ventilator tube was removed last week.

In the case of Mr. Nikolouzos, his family found alternate care, and he was transferred Sunday from St. Luke’s Episcopal Hospital to a San Antonio nursing home. An invalid since 2001 after bleeding in his brain, he fell into what doctors called a hopeless condition recently.

The 1999 Texas law was an effort to clarify and simplify previous law on end-of-life issues, previously covered in a disjointed series of statutes.

Here’s what the hospital said regarding the removal of the ventilator:

“From the time Sun was born … he was on life support because his chest cavity and lungs could not grow and develop the capacity to support his body. He was slowly suffocating to death,” Texas Children’s said in a statement today.

Texas Children’s contended that continuing care for Sun was medically inappropriate, prolonged suffering and violated physician ethics. Hudson argued her son just needed more time to grow and be weaned from the ventilator.

You’ll find the rest of that story here. The Houston Chronicle placed the above quote toward the bottom of the story, where few would read it. They worked hard to present this case in as bad a light as possible for President Bush, but you can still see the real story if you read between the lines. The hospital called 40 other facilities, none of which would take this baby just to watch him slowly suffocate to death. I happen to know a thing or two about slow suffocation. It’s not a pleasant way to die, especially over several months. The tragedy is not lost on me. This mother’s frantic clinging to a life blinded her to the fact that there was no hope, and to the extreme suffering of this infant.

One more thing: Most, though by no means all, of those screaming the loudest about this baby’s death are the same ones who would have screamed for the right to kill it seven months earlier. Inconsistency, anyone?

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

A Culture of Death: Devil’s Advocate

Posted by Mark on March 25, 2005

A wonderful dialogue is taking place over at Devil’s Advocate on Teri’s death. The comments are a wonderful example of the agony on both sides. Great read.

Posted in War and Terror | Leave a Comment »