Brother Bush’s Bullshit Defeated

For those of you who don’t know:
In Florida, a woman named Terri Schiavo has been in a “persistent vegetative state” for over a decade. That means she’s brain dead. Her husband has been pushing for her to be taken off life support for a long time.
Her parents have fought it, legally, saying that some behavior she exhibits means she’s not brain dead (she actually acts “awake”, but it’s more like her autoneural response system is doing that. Chicken with its head cut off syndrome).
Her husband won the court battle, and Terri’s feeding tube was removed. Which is when Governor Jeb Bush stepped in and made a law that required her tube be reinserted. Why this violation of human rights? Why this travesty of law? Because he’s more beholden to the religious right than to the constitution. This is a family tradition.
Today, he got the big mighty finger.

14 Responses to “Brother Bush’s Bullshit Defeated”

---

On topic: Very good. I think euthanasia is a tricky and murky issue, but I think that this case sets a positive precedent, ruling as it does on governmental powers rather than directly on ethical issues.

Off topic: Owen, could you please try to keep the Intro section short and have the body of your post in the Body section? I shifted this one, as I have a few others. Thanks.

Paradoxdruid - September 23rd, 2004 at 1:36 pm

---

Whoops. Will do.

Owen - September 23rd, 2004 at 2:12 pm

---

Actually the governments right in this type of case were really set years ago. This has been an issue several times, and as far as I can tell (lacking the time and energy to perform a deep investigation), the rule of the law was that in the abesence of a living will the spouse controls the use of life prolonging treatments. Thats what made this case so bad. The Flordia government actions flew in the face of 20 years of court rulings.

Gilvoro - September 23rd, 2004 at 6:07 pm

---

I am so glad this ruling went the way it did, though not too surprised. Like Gilvoro said this law went against pretty much every court ruling that had been decided. We actually spent quite some time on this issue in my bioethics class last year. From what I remember there has to be some evidence to support removing life support, I’m forgetting the technical term but it’s somewhere between the preponderence of evidence for civil trials and beyond reasonable doubt for criminal trials. In the previous court rulings they decided that the husband saying Teri had told him she wouldn’t want to be kept alive like this was enough evidence, since the parents were basically trying to argue she is still conscious and not much else.

The thing that made this so ridiculous was that the Florida law was pretty much giving the governor the power to overrule the courts. The precedents on the life support have been in place for years, so this really should just be about seperation of powers.

mcmillan - September 24th, 2004 at 7:06 am

---

Speaking of power-to-overrule-courts: The US House passed a law yesterday saying that the Supreme Court had no jurisdiction over the Pledge of Allegiance.

Owen - September 24th, 2004 at 8:49 am

---

Funny I thought it had to be an admenment before the congress could keep the courts out of it.

Gilvoro - September 24th, 2004 at 5:39 pm

---

How is what logical?

gilvoro - September 25th, 2004 at 9:05 am

---

It won’t make it to the Senate this session, which means starting at square one next session, which I doubt they’ll do.
This is an example of election year political ploys at their greatest.
You’ll probably also see the end to the gay marriage debate the instant the election is over.
Republicans: Vote for God and Marriage, get Enron.

Owen - September 24th, 2004 at 9:47 pm

---

how is that even remotely logical?

mallorn - September 24th, 2004 at 10:12 pm

---

Well then, to defend myself:
Many people vote Republican based on “family values”. What have Republicans done in the last four years, when they were entirely unfettered, to reinforce family values? One bill (Partial Birth Abortion Ban) which got struck down (because the Republicans WILLFULLY ignored previous Supreme Court rulings. Yes, ladies and gents, the GOP poison pilled its own legislation).
Now, go find out how many pro-business bills they’ve passed through.

Owen - September 27th, 2004 at 8:53 am

---

I believe mallorn was irked by the statement “Republicans: Vote for God and Marriage, get Enron.” posted by Owen.

I could be wrong, though.

Paradoxdruid - September 27th, 2004 at 12:49 am

---

Doctors did do that, but, you know, science is evil and all that shit.

Bush’s “abstinence only” campaign really is war on women around the world. By refusing to fund non-abstinence only organizations around the world, he’s pulled funding from lots of NGOs that were the only source of health care for women in massively third world nations.

Owen - September 30th, 2004 at 9:08 am

---

I’m really just sick of all this bullshit. I mean, seriously, people. Do all right-wingers manage to take the classes in school that miraculously fail to mention the separation of church and state? I learned that LONG ago. Gays should be allowed to marry because they deserve equal rights. “God says marriage is for men and women” belongs out of legislature in bigots’ personal lives. And don’t even get me started on “president” Bush saying he won’t fund any sex ed. class that teaches anything other than abstinence . . .

On topic: It always seemed to me that some doctor should’ve talked to this woman’s parents and tried to explain that what they were doing was cruel and those black spots in the MRI were places that used to house their daughter’s personality and memoies. And motor skills.

ShortSpeedFreak - September 29th, 2004 at 9:59 pm

---

Oh, I know. I’ve read several articles in scientific journals that talk about how we can only empower women by providing education about HIV and other STDs, as well as providing birth control options. I’m lucky that I can afford birth control- a lot of women can’t, since lots of insurances won’t cover it. It seems stupid to me. Isn’t birth control cheaper than pre-natal care and newborn babies?

ShortSpeedFreak - September 30th, 2004 at 9:41 pm

---

Leave a Response (or trackback on your own site)

You must be logged in to post a comment.