Congress: We don't need no Constitution

RussDill said:
You need to realize that the world does not exist in "left" and "right". I think many people on this forum would term themselves, socially liberal, fiscally conservative.
Click to expand...

That's me too. I'm somewhat socially liberal, i.e I'm pro gay marriage. And a staunch atheist (why do you think I'm here!) I just can't figure out the illogic that liberals use. The constant Bush bashing shows this. Granted, he spends way too much money (like a democrat) but, I happen to think he is a big thinker, and if he pulls off this middle east democracy spreading and renders terrorism impotent, you must be ready to realize that he could go down as one of the greatest freedom fighters in the history of mankind, much to the chagrin of the left.
 
easycruise said:
That's me too. I'm somewhat socially liberal, i.e I'm pro gay marriage. And a staunch atheist (why do you think I'm here!) I just can't figure out the illogic that liberals use. The constant Bush bashing shows this. Granted, he spends way too much money (like a democrat) but, I happen to think he is a big thinker, and if he pulls off this middle east democracy spreading and renders terrorism impotent, you must be ready to realize that he could go down as one of the greatest freedom fighters in the history of mankind, much to the chagrin of the left.
Click to expand...

you keep using the words/phrases "left", "bush bashing", "liberal", etc. If you keeping phrasing your arguments in that way, or thinking in that way, you are just going to be setting up and beating down strawmen, rather than addressing the argument at hand.
 
Elind said:
Yes it is; as is Conservative Logic, Creationist Logic, My Theory Logic and sometimes Easycruise Logic.
Click to expand...

The operative word there is "sometimes"! LOL! Might you have some examples of where I missed?

My newsmax reference on Howard dean was denounced, but proved correct. My thread on Hillary referenced from WorldnetDaily was denounced yet also proved correct.

And I still fervently stand by my comments of faulty liberal logic of Schiavo, partial-birth abortion and pedophiles.
 
easycruise said:

And I still fervently stand by my comments of faulty liberal logic of Schiavo, partial-birth abortion and pedophiles.
Click to expand...

Your own logic has been to point out that people survive without half a brain, overlooking which 50% they are missing, and the claim by a nurse that the husband is a bad, bad man.

Death occurs when the brain dies. Not when breathing stops, not when the heart stops, not even when the heart dies, organs can be transpanted. Terri's brain died 15 years ago, I challenge you to come up with any evidence to the contrary.
 
easycruise said:
The operative word there is "sometimes"! LOL! Might you have some examples of where I missed?

My newsmax reference on Howard dean was denounced, but proved correct. My thread on Hillary referenced from WorldnetDaily was denounced yet also proved correct.

And I still fervently stand by my comments of faulty liberal logic of Schiavo, partial-birth abortion and pedophiles.
Click to expand...

I apologize for succumbing to the temptation to get off topic, sort of.

To quote Russdill; "you keep using the words/phrases "left", "bush bashing", "liberal", etc. If you keeping phrasing your arguments in that way, or thinking in that way, you are just going to be setting up and beating down strawmen, rather than addressing the argument at hand."

I don't disagree with many of your opinions in essence, but I object to your misuse of language to make an emotive, rather than Logical, point. Logic can be faulty or correct, but when you label it as you do, the word should be something like "position" or "opinion", not Logic, and when you categorize issues like partial birth abortion with pedophilia you lose credibility altogether.

How many "liberals" do you know who argue in favor, in any form, for pedophilia? Is that an example of where your fervent "logic" missed the substance altogether?
 
Ace_of_Sevens said:
Weren't Republicans all about the sanctity of marriage a few months ago? I could have sworn they were.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure I get this line of argument. I'm very much for letting the Husband make the decisions for his wife. I think the parents are wrong.

However, those Republicans who are for keeping Terry alive believe that the husband is trying to kill her. How does "sanctity of marriage" trump that?
 
RandFan said:
Well of course. Godwin predicted you would compare Bush to Hitler. Thank you for proving him correct.
Click to expand...
I think he was saying the History channel is the Hitler channel, presumably based on the many WWII/Nazi/Hitler programs they show.
 
RandFan said:
I'm not sure I get this line of argument. I'm very much for letting the Husband make the decisions for his wife. I think the parents are wrong.

However, those Republicans who are for keeping Terry alive believe that the husband is trying to kill her. How does "sanctity of marriage" trump that?
Click to expand...
How does some ill-defined "belief" on the part of the parents trump "sanctity of marriage?" They can "believe" all they want but they have to get a court to substantiate and act on those beliefs. Hasn't happened in more than a decade so an impartial observer would have to conclude that their beliefs are without substance.
 
RussDill said:
Your own logic has been to point out that people survive without half a brain, overlooking which 50% they are missing, and the claim by a nurse that the husband is a bad, bad man.

Death occurs when the brain dies. Not when breathing stops, not when the heart stops, not even when the heart dies, organs can be transpanted. Terri's brain died 15 years ago, I challenge you to come up with any evidence to the contrary.
Click to expand...

Material3, a poster on this thread, says he has a clinic full of your so-called "brain dead" people every day, similar to Terry. I think he/she would take issue with your characterization. I'll defer to his/her judgement.
 
Elind said:
I don't disagree with many of your opinions in essence, but I object to your misuse of language to make an emotive, rather than Logical, point. Logic can be faulty or correct, but when you label it as you do, the word should be something like "position" or "opinion", not Logic, and when you categorize issues like partial birth abortion with pedophilia you lose credibility altogether.

How many "liberals" do you know who argue in favor, in any form, for pedophilia? Is that an example of where your fervent "logic" missed the substance altogether?
Click to expand...

You really need to read the previous posts on a thread before making a post like that. .otherwise you look lazy and ignorant about the arguments. Here's what I said previously.....


1. No living will, no coma, no respirator, no terminal disease. Kill her anyway, Husband says. He treats wife badly, withholds any and all treatment, says "When is that bitch going to die" (Nurse testimony)

Liberals want to kill her anyway.

2. Partial birth abortion. Fetus's head is out of the canal, stick a spear up the nostril and destroy the brain.

Liberals OK with that killing.

3. Pedophile confesses to raping and killing little girl and buries her in shallow grave.

Liberals not OK with the death penalty for that killer.
 
easycruise said:
Material3, a poster on this thread, says he has a clinic full of your so-called "brain dead" people every day, similar to Terry. I think he/she would take issue with your characterization. I'll defer to his/her judgement.
Click to expand...

"Similar to Terry." I love that. I've heard lots of non-medical types use this sort of phrase lately, that they know of a case "similar to Terry" where the person woke up.

Nobody in a persistant vegitative state has ever recovered. Ever. The people who are "similar to Terry" who have recovered were not in PVS. PVS != brain death, but it's not life either. The woman has no higher brain function and never will. There's no awareness there, and no two-second video clip can change that. The woman is, for all intents and purposes, already dead. The parents want to keep this shell alive out of pure selfishness; they don't want to let go.
 
Ace_of_Sevens said:
Weren't Republicans all about the sanctity of marriage a few months ago? I could have sworn they were.
Click to expand...

No, the republicans are all about the rule of law. There was no living will, only oral statements made only to a estranged husband (many witnesses say their marriage was on the rocks). Family says not to kill her, they'll take care of her. "She responds to us during visits." Maybe, maybe not.

But, one thing is certain, the family pet gets euthanized in a much more humane way than terry.
 
easycruise said:
No, the republicans are all about the rule of law. There was no living will, only oral statements made only to a estranged husband (many witnesses say their marriage was on the rocks). Family says not to kill her, they'll take care of her. "She responds to us during visits." Maybe, maybe not.
Click to expand...

Yes, maybe, maybe not. It seems reasonable to get a host of doctors in there to examine her and see how responsive she is. Wait, they've done that, and come to the conclusion that she isn't.


But, one thing is certain, the family pet gets euthanized in a much more humane way than terry.
Click to expand...

Yes, because doing so is legal. Euthanising humans in such a way is not. Administering a lethal dose of morphine, though completely painless, would get a doctor arrested on murder charges.
 
easycruise said:
No, the republicans are all about the rule of law. There was no living will, only oral statements made only to a estranged husband (many witnesses say their marriage was on the rocks). Family says not to kill her, they'll take care of her. "She responds to us during visits." Maybe, maybe not.

But, one thing is certain, the family pet gets euthanized in a much more humane way than terry.
Click to expand...

Ok, so the rule of law says that if a husband is "estranged" he loses the right to make medical decisions on behalf of his incapacitated wife? Just what is the legal standard of "estranged"? Show me that statute and I'll believe Republicans are about rule of law here.
 
easycruise said:
But, one thing is certain, the family pet gets euthanized in a much more humane way than terry.
Click to expand...

Correct.

And if not for fundy scumbags like Pat Robertson and his boot licking toadies in the congress (like soon-to-be-indicted-criminal Tom Delay), she could get the same humane treatment.
 
easycruise said:

1. No living will, no coma, no respirator, no terminal disease.
Click to expand...


Repeat after me: Persistant Vegitative State

Kill her anyway, Husband says.
Click to expand...

Do you realise what her cerebral cortex is like right now?

He treats wife badly, withholds any and all treatment,
Click to expand...

Flat out lie. Thanks to his efforts, she is one of the few bed-ridden patients without bedsores. The staff actually complained about him being on their case about her treatment. There is no tangible evidence of abuse. These are lies that Terri's parents told you.

He also travelled across the country with her to try an experimental therapy. Didn't work. I suppose that doesn't count in your book.

says "When is that bitch going to die" (Nurse testimony)
Click to expand...

That testimony was rejected by the courts. The nurse in question was dismissed (before testifying) for sloppy care and cannot be a nurse any more. The judge ruled that for her testimony to be true, the entire medical staff as well as Terri's parents would have to have been in on a conspiracy of silence.

Repeating your assertion doesn't make your lies come true.

Liberals want to kill her anyway.
Click to expand...

And you want to use her as a political tool.
 
easycruise said:
He treats wife badly, withholds any and all treatment, says "When is that bitch going to die" (Nurse testimony)
Click to expand...

Yeah, good one. The nurse's testimony was thrown out years ago by the judge. He termed her allegation too incredible to believe. She claimed she contacted Terri's parents yet they never acknoldged it in the court cases. The nurse claimed to witness Terri doing thinsg nobody else has ever seen. Amazing! the nurse claims to have heard Michael Schiavo say things that nobody else has heard him say. The list goes on and on why this nurse is not a credible witness.

But don't let any mitigating facts get in your way, Easycruise. I can tell you have mad eup your mind and the facts be damned! Carry on, Senor Quixote!

Lurker
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom