Double Body
Note: This thread is NOT about the Schiavo case, but the actual LAWS involved.
Even as the president was supporting his brother, Florida governor Jeb Bush, and congressional Republicans in "defending the culture of life" in the Schiavo case, doctors in Houston were pulling the breathing tube from the throat of an ailing infant.
By Chris Floyd
The boy suffocated within seconds, legally killed -- against the wishes of his anguished mother -- in accordance with a draconian law signed as a "cost-saving" measure by the state's former governor: George W. Bush.
Ref. https://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article8359.htm
https://snipurl.com/dntw
This seems like a hypocritical law that Bush signed in light of this news. Now I am a Bush supporter, but this was the signing of laws on two different extremes. There should never be a "cost-saving" law that involves human peoples lives at stake. We should never approve of laws that lessen the value of life or take the authority over life out of someones hands or their guardians hands. The hospital should never have the authority to pull the plug on anyone unless no one is their to make the decision and every attempt to find someone to make that decision has been made.
I read the article. Pretty inflamatory language, wouldn't you say. I wonder if this isn't an attempt to make political points against Bush.
I do think that a law such as this needs to be carefully reviewed. There is no such thing as a lawful killing of an innocent, IMO.
International Level: International Guru / Political Participation: 854 85.4%
I had a difficult time reading this article because it was so opinionated and negative. I had to read it several times to get past the negative sentiment it portrayed to get the gist of what was being discussed. I agree that the law does not seem to be very humane, as it takes away any rights that the parents may have had in making a decision about their child. With all the tension surrounding the current life or death issue in the news, I believe some careful scrutinizing and/or changes need to be made to current law. The problem is do we change the laws to one side or the other, or make it even more vague than before so that there is room for latitude, and in the end, more disagreement and dispute. It is a lose-lose situation in my opinion.
International Level: Envoy / Political Participation: 241 24.1%