Congress

Our Congress sucks. They pass this law, of questionable constitutionality, to intervene, but the law is so poorly written that it does not accomplish the desired effect, to keep Mrs. Schiavo alive. The courts basically have laughed at it as they have tossed it out. Why the law was written only to apply to this case is beyond comprehension and means that it obviously is unconstitutional and discriminatory and would be tossed out on appeal, if a district judge had complied with its wishes. 2006 cant come fast enough. We need regime change in that stale over zealous body. Also an addendum to respond to LanceRoxas. I dont think our society should force people to stay alive if they would rather not live, which is at issue here. I think it is just as bad to make some one live against their will as it is to make them die against their will.

try doing something usefull.

maybe we should just drag her outside and shoot her in the head, Lance? and the husband is a dirtball? he's been offered money and all else to move away from this case and to let it be. why is it all of the sudden assumed the guys a dirtball b/c he doesnt want his wife, a woman he loved, to suffer? and let's not mince words here--was it not Terri Schiavo's eating disorder and an imbalance in her potassium levels which lead to this state in the first place. how about the government/congress do something about eating disorder education in terri's name instead? wouldn't that help more than have a family suffer. would such bold moves help the common good? another brilliant post from spokeman of the soulles masses.UPDATE: let's be real here, Lance. you only advocate common citizenship and would defend opposite policy if it was dicated in your economics/poli sci books. dont go patting yourself on the back just yet.

While I can certainly understand the position that congress is a political haven for grandstanding & has no place to intervene with this matter, I can also understand the argument that Michael Schiavo, or any spouse for that matter, can't be given the right to a mercy killing based on a so-called conversation he had with his wife 17 to 19 years ago (supposedly Terri told Michael the exact instructions on what to do with her in this situation during a tv show...interesting to say the least). Honestly people, if we are trying to get past the emotion and politics of this case shouldn't we try to realize that what Terri's husband wants to do is, like Lance has stated, the same thing Jack Kevorkian and other medical professionals who commited mercy killings did? Let's not be so quick to dismiss a perfectly valid argument because it contradicts the logic behind Michael Schiavo's decision to deny his wife the food and water she needs to survive.

My maternal grandmother was a Christian Scientist. Because of her core belief system, she was passionate about being granted the right to die naturally and on her on terms. She saw no dignity in being artificially kept alive, and it would have been her worst nightmare to be medically forced alive at a time when she thought God was trying to call her home. My other grandmother grew just as concerned about dying with grace after spending ten years feeding my bedridden grandfather all of his meals, in response to his debilitating case of Parkinsons that would leave him unable to recognize his own devoted wife. In all of these cases, it would have been unethical for Congressmen to disrespect any of my grandparents final wishes to choose peaceful hospice care over an extensive system of artificial sustenance. These politicians have their own best interests at heart, and not Terri's or her family's. Congress is not her family, they are not her personal doctors, they have too many hidde... Read more

Congress should ban the removal of feeding tubes- period! It's illegal to starve your infant children to death. It's illegal to starve YOURSELF to death for Christ sake. We literally force anorexics into mental hospitals if they've become threats to themselves. But in this case we're allowing a husband- a dirtball who wants his wife dead- the power to execute her because she's no longer useful. Our constitution exclusively grants the power to the Peoples House to create laws that promote the common good. In this case it can not be argued that starving a person to death is in any way dignified nor does it promote the greater good of our society. In Nazi Germany the first to go were the disabled and the slope followed to even more undesirables. Our Congress should legislate against such barbarism and create exclusions under Article 3 that keep such cases out of the courts all together. ****Skizero, Im all for a congressionally funded program for eating disorders- I think that woul... Read more

**EO, I think the more accurate comparison would be if congress crafted a law specifically to allow a particular gay couple to get married because of the spectacular contingencies around that particular couple. I've said elsewhere that I'm not comfortable with willfully cutting off food from this woman. But that doesn't change the heart of the matter that this is about interpretation of the law, not crafting new laws to fit a specific, albeit tragic situation. And that is the job of the courts - not the lawmakers, not the president. ** Absolutely not. As elected officials, anything that Congress touches has the tendency to turn into political grandstanding. Some of the sound bytes that I've heard the last few days from Congress on this matter have been sickening. And the last thing we should be doing is crafting legislation on a situation by situation basis - this should be an issue of interpretation of the law, which clearly falls to the courts.

These people can't agree on the color of sh#t and you want them to decide an issue that is best left to a wife and husband? Wake me up when it's over. . .

No. The posturing and maneuvering by this august body, on both sides of the aisle and on both sides of the issue, is nothing short of disgraceful. UPDATE: A dangerous and alarming precedent has been set with this case specific legislation. Passing such legislation is an enormous mistake which is going to haunt legislation and judiciary councils for years to come.

Congresses political posturing in this case has been nothing short of disgusting. It seems to me that both sides are trying to score political points out of this tragic situation. This is a case that under normal circumstances should have gone no further than the state court. Yesterday Congress passed and Bush signed legislation giving Terri's parents a personal right to sue in federal court. Since when can Congress make law to fit a specific situation? Our legal system is founded on the notion that no governmental body can arbitrarily make law for one individual situation. Law cannot be made by fiat; it has to be made to apply in all situations. This serves as a means to de-legitimize our entire legal system. As I pointed out before, we are a nation of laws, not of men. This legislation truly has done great damage to the notion of federalism; an integral part of the Founders plan to ensure that the Central Government would never have enough power to be allowed to abuse it. Power to ... Read more

UPDATE: I need someone to straighten me out. It is sssooo urgent for us to change federal law to allow gays to marry each other because they deserve equal protection under the law. Right? But Terri Schiavo is not entitled to any such protection? Is this the ultimate irony? You're pro-gay marriage, but anti-Terry Schiavo. The gays are still living, and Terri has to die. ORIGINAL POST: In a practical sense, it was the passage of the legislation, signed by the president, which elevated this case out of the Florida Court System, which I applaud. The vote was overwhelming, so decry the republicans all you want, but try not to give the democrat sheep a complete pass. Terri Schiavo's right to equal protection under the law has been denied, like it or not. Is she not entitled to such protection? How many brain damaged patients are there, in every city in the US, whose protection has now similarly dissipated along with Terri's? It's so easy to say well, I wouldn't want to live that... Read more

It's interesting that the same people who are so intent on preserving life at all costs in this case are generally the same people who gleefully support legal execution.

It should have never came to this level. Once it gets here, Bush has to deal with it one way or another.

No, absolutely not. It's just politics, and the usual angling for power and position and saying the right thing at the right time. Is that more cynical than usual for me? Yeah, but this case pisses me off. The people in Congress don't give a rat's ass about the suffering of these people.

I'm not sure how this is a Congressional issue, but the laws should be made clear over who gets to make decisions to quit life support if there is no instruction from the individual beforehand.

Frist, Delay, Hastert and the rest of them have shown themselves only to be political whores, pandering to the evangelical religious right. Then there are the Dems that went along with them to make political hay. They have no business being involved here.