Re: It looks like the party of 'choice' is losing again!
Well folks, we have generously been granted some wisdom and moral insight from a progressive, enlightened, progenitor of political correctness and tolerant inclusion; yes a proud constituent of John Kerry and Ted Kennedy from the great Peoples Republic of Massachusetstan. What a laugh!<br /><br />I'm not lashing out at anybody, but he basically states, "Hey, the relationship between a husband and wife is sacred and what are the parents getting involved here for? Much less our elected representatives!" Well, you could say that the parents are not intruding or infringing on any relationship between husband and wife. What they're trying to do is save their daughter's life. What's wrong with that? You know, barring any evidence at all beyond the husband's representations -- I mean, he's got a girlfriend now and a few kids with her. Why shouldn't the parent fight for the life of their child? And this is another thing. <br /><br />FR, among others say, "Why is Congress getting involved in this? What's Congress got to do with this? It's a local case. It's an individual case." Can I take you back to our founding documents and particularly the Declaration of Independence? We are all "endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights. The right to life (clearing throat), liberty, pursuit of happiness." You could make the argument that it certainly is a charge of government to defend and protect life, given that this forms one of the building blocks of the foundation of our country, and I find it fascinating here. I've studied this. I've been watching this particularly intensely today as interests outside of the Schiavo family and the Schindler family get involved in this, and I am sorry to say this, but I can't find a liberal Democrat anywhere who's standing up for this woman's right to live (at least not ones who's motives aren't suspect, an opinion I base soley on thier past voting records and their stance in general to the sanctity of human life versus that of a spotted owl or snail darter.). Call me a hayseed or a rube, but it seems to me that it's Republicans that are doing what they can to protect this woman's life and that takes me back to another case involving the federal government and Florida, and that's Elian Gonzales. This case reminds me -- and just in terms of the sides drawn here in the courts, you know, who is opposing who, who believes what -- of the Gonzales case. <br /> I mean, the issues are completely different but the sides are the same. Some of us in this country instinctively defend life and liberty. The other side doesn't. When it came to the liberty of Elian Gonzales, Janet Reno and the Clinton administration sided with who? Fidel Castro and ignored the wishes of the mother and brought some guy up they said was his father and shipped him back down to this little gulag called Cuba, where we just learned that home makers are going to be given by the state rice cookers, even though there's a rice shortage because of a drought and there's no electricity to use the rice cookers. And we know that the rice cookers were given not to feed people but because there was a black market being developed in rice cookers and the state in Cuba cannot handle the black market entrepreneurism (which raises the obvious question,: Why are Liberal democrats indistinguishable from Cuban communist dicators? Hmmmmmmm....). So they'd send a little boy off to tyranny; they would end this woman's life with apparently no compunction. It's just interesting to see the sides, and the battle lines drawn here, and it's amazing to me who you can always find standing up for life and liberty, and it just happens to be conservatives and Republicans that do it. I mean, if I'm wrong, if somebody can show me where the Democrats in Washington, the Democrats anywhere, are speaking up about this, I'll be glad to correct myself(the pitiable few Dems who voted "yea" last night notwithstanding).
