It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Republicans: Are you still blind to the ways?

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 22 2005 @ 06:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThunderCloud

Yes, the Republicans are hypocrites. But, so are the Democrats.


Thank you for the most significant line so far in this thread. They are all hypocrites. I applaud you for your honesty.

But then you lost me. She does have rights. And when she is incapacitated, those rights are defaulted to the spouse then to the parents. In this case, since there is no living will and she was married, it is the husband's responsibility to care for her rights. And, if what he says is true, he is respecting those requests. But, we cannot debate the truth of those or we will never have solvency for this issue. (In which all issues should have.) The authority of the rights of a guardian is Michael Schiavo's alone. Therefore, he does have the final say.




posted on Mar, 22 2005 @ 06:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThunderCloud

My point exactly. Who's protecting the life of other brain damaged people in the U.S.?


Their families are and the wishes of the people that care for them, or that let them pass away, that is the way it goes, and you will never find out, because is not for us to know when other families are doing life and death decisions somewhere in America.

Is nothing you can do about this, the law has prevail and that is the way it should be, by law the husband is the one to carry the wishes of the spouse.

Be upset to the people that is robing the family from their privacy to make it into propaganda telling the grieving parents that they can win.

And again is beyond you and me, you can argue, cry, pray if you wish but is not longer for us to decide, but the person that has that right, the husband.

And that is the end of it.



posted on Mar, 22 2005 @ 06:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by RANT
Ambient, I hope you come back to discuss this because most moderates remain silent on these things.

What of all this Schiavo nonsese? Are you going to let them get away with it?

Why do you let them get away with it? I can't stop your party. You can.

You want the Dems to stop them, yet your party is trying to nuke the long standing filibuster rules while they hold a majority. Where do you stand there?

Does it warm your cockles to hear Democrats upholding the will of the majority of Americans called "obstructionists" for fighting the extremist tyranny you yourself hate within your own party?


Frankly, I think I went farther than most in saying that I'm not pleased with some of the things going on. Mind you, SOME of the things. Also, don't say it's "my" party. I'm registered as an Independant, and don't plan to change. I feel no need to defend the Republicans, since they are not "my" party. This election I voted mostly Republican because of foreign policy and the importance I place on world affairs at this point in our history. That in no way assures that the next election I will do the same. Party loyalty means absolutely 0 to me.

And yes, I do rely on the left to keep the right in check and vice-versa. The only way to stop something in motion is to apply equal but opposite force. If gridlock is the only way to keep the government (right or left) from doing more harm, so be it. I don't trust any of them and think what America needs the most is term limits for Congress and Federal Judges (including the Supreme Court).

BTW Rant, I don't pander to anyone, certainly not the religious right, who I dislike just about as much as I dislike the socialist class warfare pimps on the left. To imply that I tow the Republican line is to show that you have made incorrect assumptions about my political idealology. That's ok. I imagine it's hard to see the middle sometimes from waaaayyyyy over there on the left. The view of the middle is almost certainly as blurry from the far right too.

Once again, on the Terry Schavio issue, it amazes me that the same people who claimed to be trying to save the institution of marrage months ago by "protecting" it from gay people are now damaging it by trying to strip away the traditional role of the spouse to make decisions such as this. I personally believe that the govenment has no business whatsoever involving itself in either of those issues. In this case (and what I really meant in my previous post) is that about as many democrats seemed to have voted for this very shortsighted Terry Schavio bill as republicans did. Seems your team is going right along with the program on this one. Why do you think that is? It's because they are now willing to say what they have decided that the American people want to hear. So much to sticking to principles, huh? As to your question: "What am I going to do?" What exactly do you expect me to do? Taking steps to make sure that I don't wind up in the same position some day is about the only option I have on this issue.

Buy hey, Rant, I bet you won't be satisfied until you hear me say the Republicans are evil, dirty, low down, and out to destroy us all. Sorry, I don't believe that about the Republicans, or the Democrats for that matter. I think they are human just like the rest of us and prone to error, distraction, shortsightedness, and all the rest of human nastiness, especially when blinded by the pursuit of power, as I think ALL of them are. Heh, those who refuse to account for human nature when analysing the behavior of others are doomed to a life of dissappointment and frustration.

Yep, I like it just fine here on the fence. Thanks.



posted on Mar, 22 2005 @ 07:00 PM
link   
As a nation we are split both politically and philisophically. Maybe John Titor was right about an American Civil War in 2005. We may not be killing each other physically, but metaphorically we sure got a grip on each others throat.



posted on Mar, 22 2005 @ 07:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ambient Sound
Frankly, I think I went farther than most in saying that I'm not pleased with some of the things going on. Mind you, SOME of the things. Also, don't say it's "my" party. I'm registered as an Independant, and don't plan to change. I feel no need to defend the Republicans, since they are not "my" party. This election I voted mostly Republican because of foreign policy and the importance I place on world affairs at this point in our history. That in no way assures that the next election I will do the same. Party loyalty means absolutely 0 to me.


That's fine. I keep forgetting when pressed none of the people that actually vote for right wing extremists actually are right wing extremists. Everyone is "really" something else on the Internet and in no way responsible for the parties they empower.


We actually agree on all these issues being discussed though. Despite you finding me waaaaaaaaaaay to the left for being a moderate Democrat that agrees with most Americans on issues and I "insulting" you with the observation of being a moderate Republican I presumed to do same.



posted on Mar, 23 2005 @ 06:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ambient Sound
Once again, on the Terry Schavio issue, it amazes me that the same people who claimed to be trying to save the institution of marrage months ago by "protecting" it from gay people are now damaging it by trying to strip away the traditional role of the spouse to make decisions such as this. I personally believe that the govenment has no business whatsoever involving itself in either of those issues. In this case (and what I really meant in my previous post) is that about as many democrats seemed to have voted for this very shortsighted Terry Schavio bill as republicans did. Seems your team is going right along with the program on this one. Why do you think that is? It's because they are now willing to say what they have decided that the American people want to hear. So much to sticking to principles, huh? As to your question: "What am I going to do?" What exactly do you expect me to do? Taking steps to make sure that I don't wind up in the same position some day is about the only option I have on this issue.


You have voted Ambient Sound for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.

Great point. One that I would not of even ventured to. And it seems to be a point that is missed in all of the emotion that is running rampant through the whole dern debate. I am glad to see people who gets it.

This is no partisan issue. No party lines to truly throw around here. Just blame to those who have politicized it. In Washington, everyone sees being against her is political suicide. If you thought we had some nasty re-election commercials this past year, next year's will be aburd. The only left wing/right wing thing to be debated is the euthanasia issue. But no one will stand up for it in Washington for many years.



posted on Mar, 23 2005 @ 02:50 PM
link   
[font color=blueFont] I think many people have forgotten that while we are all having dinner or lunch with our families and loved ones, there is one woman STARVING to DEATH in a bed, Helpless and at the mercy of selfrighteous Judges and a evil husband, that only decided Terry wanted to die after getting his MILLION bucks... Not even criminals are starved to death by courts. A husband demands that his wife is starved to death, and the courts agree with him... than what bases do "Spousela buse" cases have in court ????

If starving a helpless woman to death is humain, what moral do we have to condemen those who are Pro-Death Penalty or Pro-Abortion??? If staving a person to death is humain, how can we point the finger at Chinese orphanages where children are abandoned to die of starvation by their own parents choice?
[/font]



posted on Mar, 23 2005 @ 04:52 PM
link   
I haven't forgot that. But have you forgot that it is the right of the guardian to allow this? Even if he is evil, it is his decision. And to overturn said decision would make a very bad precedent. And the so called "self-righteous" judges are only up-holding it...you know the decision that is protected by the law...the thing the judges review to make sure he is well within it?

If this guy is so driven by money, money that is indeed gone, why did he not take the one or ten million dollar offer?

And further more, the only reason why the woman is being starved to death is because of the "life" movement. They have stopped active euthanasia. Passive, the most barbaric of the two, is the only option that is left. So why don't you complain to the "self-righteous" folks who come out against active euthanasia? And nobody has called it humane...I don't believe.

No basis for spousal abuse, because when she slipped into the vegitative state, her rights became the rights of the husband. Therefore, he is legally entitled to allow this case of passive euthanasia. Do not mistake it for murder...it is just a very awful way to be let go. It is hardly any different morally than turning off the machine...this just takes a little while longer.



posted on Mar, 24 2005 @ 04:04 PM
link   
cant you see what "legal euthanasia" can bring to this society ??? cant you see ahead ??? what if it is you ??/ or you family ... you may not think like that now, but you cant see the future ...



posted on Mar, 24 2005 @ 05:55 PM
link   
Yes I can, and I have a cousin who is more than willing to do me in if I am in that position. In fact, I have made it abundantly clear to many people in my family that I never want to be in that condition if it is so dire that I will never recover.

But, I would not have to worry about my cousin if they passed active euthanasia laws. I believe it is you who cannot see past your nose, sir. Call it the basic human dignity act. I have seen some people struggle with illness in my time and I would never ever care to go through that. And if you have ever seen someone battle truly terminal cancer for over a year, I doubt you would want that for yourself.

But some people make it too hard. What are you afraid of?



posted on Mar, 24 2005 @ 06:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by RANT
We actually agree on all these issues being discussed though. Despite you finding me waaaaaaaaaaay to the left for being a moderate Democrat that agrees with most Americans on issues and I "insulting" you with the observation of being a moderate Republican I presumed to do same.


I stand corrected then. Now that I think about it, it's not your positions that seem far left to me, it's just the vehemence with which you oppose everything on the right, seemingly without regard for the merits of the right or left positions but opposing things for no other reason than the idea originated with people you don't like.

No, I'm not going to go through your posts and get examples to support what I just said. I'm sure I just exagerated and generalized. It's just an impression I've gotten that I thought I would share with ya.

It's actually probable that we agree on more than you think, but like I said before, I believe that at this time, only the right has the political will to do what is required of us on an international level as distasteful as some of it might be. I believe that the policies the left claims to support, both external and internal to the US are ineffectual, and designed to appease someone, be it socialist Europeans or just about anyone internally that they can encourage to feel oppressed by someone else.

Once again, I don't trust anyone in government very far and only on certain things. I'm a realist and know better. I don't expect much from government except for them to defend our country. The less govenment does, the better I like it.

Nationally, I vote for the people that I think are going to support and work for an enviornment where I will prosper. It's that simple. Just keep in mind that the enviornments I prosper in may not be as hospitible to some.

You know, I dislike the "rich elitist snobs" as much as the next guy, but because many of these people are too stupid to RTFM that came with their computer, I make a pretty good living. I have little sympathy for those who won't work, or want to just slide by on the efforts of someone else, so I have little regard for a lot of the various social agendas floating around. The abortion issues or gay marrage issues affect me not at all. I have almost no respect at all for organized religion so pandering to those folks falls far short of influencing my opinions, except to make me dislike them more, (as in the Schavio case). No one can bribe me with a handout program or convince me that I've been oppressed in some way (except by the ex-wife, no sympathy there), because I am a divorced white 41 year old male with no children. I will be the very last group to get anything except the friggin blame.

If the current trend of the Administration and the Congress getting way too deep into stuff they have no business concerning themselves with, like Schavio and Baseball, continues, they won't be gettng my vote next time.

There RANT, make ya feel better?



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join