| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Gary DeWaay" |
| Date: |
17 Aug 2005 01:11:23 AM |
| Object: |
Sheehan vs Shiavo... |
Could someone explain to me why one mother is vilified by righties, and
the other was embraced?
--
Gary
QUESTION: Given recent developments in the CIA leak case, particularly
Vice President Cheney's discussions with the investigators, do you still
stand by what you said several months ago, suggesting that it might be
difficult to identify anybody who leak the agent's name? And do you stand
by your pledge to fire anyone found to have done so?
BUSH: Yes. And that's up to the U.S. attorney to find the facts.
June 10 2004
.
|
|
| User: "Rick" |
|
| Title: Re: Sheehan vs Shiavo... |
17 Aug 2005 06:15:45 PM |
|
|
Gail Futoran wrote in message ...
"Ian Chesterton" <ichesterton@spfd.com> wrote in message
[snip]
Why the more intelligent, better educated, more
moderate conservatives went along with this BS
is beyond me, but is a *major* reason why, in the
past four years, I have become anti-religious, at
least in principle if not in practice. (I've been an
atheist for about 25 years - I'm now 62 years old -
and have never before the neo-con domination
of American life had a problem with religion or
religious people, which describes almost all of my
friends and relatives.)
Don't forget the Democrats who voted for that bill:
http://uspolitics.about.com/od/electionissues/a/sb686_vote.htm
And then (unfortunately) Jesse Jackson, and a bunch of others outside
theusual group of suspects:
http://www.pnionline.com/dnblog/attytood/archives/001651.html
- Rick
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ian Chesterton" |
|
| Title: Re: Sheehan vs Shiavo... |
17 Aug 2005 06:59:47 PM |
|
|
Rick wrote:
Gail Futoran wrote in message ...
"Ian Chesterton" <ichesterton@spfd.com> wrote in message
[snip]
Why the more intelligent, better educated, more
moderate conservatives went along with this BS
is beyond me, but is a *major* reason why, in the
past four years, I have become anti-religious, at
least in principle if not in practice. (I've been an
atheist for about 25 years - I'm now 62 years old -
and have never before the neo-con domination
of American life had a problem with religion or
religious people, which describes almost all of my
friends and relatives.)
Don't forget the Democrats who voted for that bill:
http://uspolitics.about.com/od/electionissues/a/sb686_vote.htm
And then (unfortunately) Jesse Jackson, and a bunch of others outside
theusual group of suspects:
http://www.pnionline.com/dnblog/attytood/archives/001651.html
- Rick
Don't blame them. The issue would have been an important one had the
fundies been telling us the truth. I would still consider Terry to have
been murdered had the autopsy come out with results supporting the
parents' accusations.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Bonde by a commodius vicus of" |
|
| Title: Re: Sheehan vs Shiavo... |
17 Aug 2005 01:32:11 PM |
|
|
Gail Futoran wrote:
"Ian Chesterton" <ichesterton@spfd.com> wrote in message
news:4302EE57.39B6@spfd.com...
Web wrote:
"Ian Chesterton" <ichesterton@spfd.com> wrote in message
news:4302D6E5.70EB@spfd.com...
You need to understand the politics of religious and political
conservatism to comprehend why sides have been taken here. As a
moderate conservative myself, I was duped by the fundies into
supporting
Terry Schiavo's cause,
You gotta explain that better. How could "fundies" dupe you? What did
they
say that made you vulnerable?
Well when you feel that it is important to err on the side of life on
the one hand, but on the other you'd prefer that the government stay out
of people's deeply personal end-of-life decisions, the Schiavo case
presents a sort of worst case scenario. The family, in violation of
Judge Greers orders, took video coverage of what now appears to have
been nothing but reflexive activity by a brain-dead and blind woman and
released the video to the press.
Yes, and the doctors explained that quite openly,
carefully, using really small words that anyone
with an IQ over 65 and a 3rd grade education
should have been able to comprehend.
They asserted some things. I guess someone with the above capacity could
just believe. The issue for me was and is whether we should be starving
someone to death when her family opposes that action and is willing to
take care of her. I don't understand what it is hurting if it makes the
family feel better to have Schiavo "alive".
The far
right, being demonstrably anti-science (because
actual knowledge challenges their delusions), was
quick to ignore assertions based on medical science.
Medical science isn't perfect when it comes to deciding things like
exactly what the situation was with someone in a PVS. People sometimes
wake up from what was termed such a state and then they change what the
person had.
Why the more intelligent, better educated, more
moderate conservatives went along with this BS
is beyond me,
Because we desperately need as a society to decide how to deal with such
circumstances and we shouldn't make it a scene out of Logan's Run.
but is a *major* reason why, in the
past four years, I have become anti-religious, at
least in principle if not in practice. (I've been an
atheist for about 25 years - I'm now 62 years old -
and have never before the neo-con domination
of American life had a problem with religion or
religious people, which describes almost all of my
friends and relatives.)
I'm not exactly sure what "neo-con" means but I'm pretty sure it isn't a
term to refer to Conservative Christian. I had thought that it referred
to folks who were formerly Liberals, that's the 'neo' part, and who had
changed to Conservative, the 'con' part. It seems now to have morphed
into just a code word for anyone a Liberal hates.
--
"And he did bring them. It took a number of years, but one by one he
brought them here. Except for his father, that old man died where he was
born." -+ "Elia Kazan, "America, America"
.
|
|
|
| User: "Apostate" |
|
| Title: Re: Sheehan vs Shiavo... |
17 Aug 2005 02:55:55 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 11:32:11 -0700, "Bill Bonde ('by a commodius vicus of recirculation')"
<spaceghoast@coasttocoast.co.uk> wrote:
Gail Futoran wrote:
"Ian Chesterton" <ichesterton@spfd.com> wrote in message
news:4302EE57.39B6@spfd.com...
Web wrote:
"Ian Chesterton" <ichesterton@spfd.com> wrote in message
news:4302D6E5.70EB@spfd.com...
You need to understand the politics of religious and political
conservatism to comprehend why sides have been taken here. As a
moderate conservative myself, I was duped by the fundies into
supporting
Terry Schiavo's cause,
You gotta explain that better. How could "fundies" dupe you? What did
they
say that made you vulnerable?
Well when you feel that it is important to err on the side of life on
the one hand, but on the other you'd prefer that the government stay out
of people's deeply personal end-of-life decisions, the Schiavo case
presents a sort of worst case scenario. The family, in violation of
Judge Greers orders, took video coverage of what now appears to have
been nothing but reflexive activity by a brain-dead and blind woman and
released the video to the press.
Yes, and the doctors explained that quite openly,
carefully, using really small words that anyone
with an IQ over 65 and a 3rd grade education
should have been able to comprehend.
They asserted some things. I guess someone with the above capacity could
just believe. The issue for me was and is whether we should be starving
someone to death when her family opposes that action and is willing to
take care of her. I don't understand what it is hurting if it makes the
family feel better to have Schiavo "alive".
The far
right, being demonstrably anti-science (because
actual knowledge challenges their delusions), was
quick to ignore assertions based on medical science.
Medical science isn't perfect when it comes to deciding things like
exactly what the situation was with someone in a PVS. People sometimes
wake up from what was termed such a state and then they change what the
person had.
Why the more intelligent, better educated, more
moderate conservatives went along with this BS
is beyond me,
Because we desperately need as a society to decide how to deal with such
circumstances and we shouldn't make it a scene out of Logan's Run.
but is a *major* reason why, in the
past four years, I have become anti-religious, at
least in principle if not in practice. (I've been an
atheist for about 25 years - I'm now 62 years old -
and have never before the neo-con domination
of American life had a problem with religion or
religious people, which describes almost all of my
friends and relatives.)
I'm not exactly sure what "neo-con" means but I'm pretty sure it isn't a
term to refer to Conservative Christian. I had thought that it referred
to folks who were formerly Liberals, that's the 'neo' part, and who had
changed to Conservative, the 'con' part. It seems now to have morphed
into just a code word for anyone a Liberal hates.
The fundamental question is: who has the right to Terry Schiavo's life?
Her parents, or she, herself, as entrusted to her next-of-kin to oversee?
That issue was extensively litigated.
Those who are tortured by a philosophical qualm about a resolution against their instincts
aren't legally entitled to upset that, merely in service of their religious feelings.
"Starved to death" is a red herring (which she couldn't have eaten, anyway.)
Her legally enforceable command was that she should not be forced into being
someone else's meat-puppet after her capacity to live as a human was gone.
Conservatives, unfortunately including her traitorous family, sought to impose
a post-mortem intervention "for her own good" against her expressed wishes.
Too bad the court couldn't order Jeb Bush starved to death, along with Tom
Delay and The Frist Shan't Be Last.
--
/Apostate
alt.atheist #1931 I've found it!
BAAWA Knife AND SMASHer
EAC Supernumerary Deputy Director, Department of Redundancy Department
plonked by Lani_girl, first post; Billions Served!
I doubt, therefore I might be.
e-mail to lower-case only
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Bonde by a commodius vicus of" |
|
| Title: Re: Sheehan vs Shiavo... |
17 Aug 2005 05:29:39 PM |
|
|
Apostate wrote:
On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 11:32:11 -0700, "Bill Bonde ('by a commodius vicus of recirculation')"
<spaceghoast@coasttocoast.co.uk> wrote:
I'm not exactly sure what "neo-con" means but I'm pretty sure it isn't a
term to refer to Conservative Christian. I had thought that it referred
to folks who were formerly Liberals, that's the 'neo' part, and who had
changed to Conservative, the 'con' part. It seems now to have morphed
into just a code word for anyone a Liberal hates.
The fundamental question is: who has the right to Terry Schiavo's life?
Her parents, or she, herself, as entrusted to her next-of-kin to oversee?
Of course what is "next of kin" but someone's parents when the spouse is
shacked up with someone else with two babies?
That issue was extensively litigated.
The problem is that Terri Schiavo could not speak and we were left with
the husband who seemed to have ulterior motives, namely that he wanted
Terri out of the way so he wouldn't be bothered with his new family.
Those who are tortured by a philosophical qualm about a resolution against their instincts
aren't legally entitled to upset that, merely in service of their religious feelings.
Why can't you stop bringing up "religion"?
"Starved to death" is a red herring (which she couldn't have eaten, anyway.)
She was fed by gavage. That isn't anything heroic, it's even used to
feed geese.
Her legally enforceable command was that she should not be forced into being
someone else's meat-puppet after her capacity to live as a human was gone.
That was not written anywhere. That was a claimed statement by her
husband, the one that seemed to be motivated by his desire to get rid of
Schiavo.
Conservatives, unfortunately including her traitorous family, sought to impose
a post-mortem intervention "for her own good" against her expressed wishes.
Traitorous family? Everyone but the husband, who wanted to marry the
women he'd replaced Terri with, wanted to keep Terri alive.
--
"And he did bring them. It took a number of years, but one by one he
brought them here. Except for his father, that old man died where he was
born." -+ "Elia Kazan, "America, America"
.
|
|
|
| User: "Web" |
|
| Title: Re: Sheehan vs Shiavo... |
18 Aug 2005 08:01:50 AM |
|
|
"Bill Bonde ('by a commodius vicus of recirculation')"
<spaceghoast@coasttocoast.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1124317915.b5cebfcd4be06f3f27068a7bd390c2f1@teranews...
Her legally enforceable command was that she should not be forced into
being
someone else's meat-puppet after her capacity to live as a human was
gone.
That was not written anywhere. That was a claimed statement by her
husband, the one that seemed to be motivated by his desire to get rid of
Schiavo.
But that point was heard by the courts, and accepted as a fact. That's what
made it legally enforceable.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Glorious Guardian of Good" |
|
| Title: Re: Sheehan vs Shiavo... |
18 Aug 2005 08:13:49 AM |
|
|
Bill Bonde ('by a commodius vicus of recirculation') wrote:
The problem is that Terri Schiavo could not speak and we were left with
the husband who seemed to have ulterior motives, namely that he wanted
Terri out of the way so he wouldn't be bothered with his new family.
Good lord, Bonzo, you *still* carrying water on this loser issue?
Whatever they're paying you, it ain't enough.
er, I mean--yeah! you tell 'em, Bonzo! Make sure to remind the whole
damn world that Team Bush, the Republican-controlled Senate and the
Republican-controlled House intervened in this private matter,
something opposed by not just Terri's next-of-kin but 82% of the
nation. Spread the word.
Remind EVERYONE of this clusterf-- er, principled, courageous stand.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Apostate" |
|
| Title: Re: Sheehan vs Shiavo... |
17 Aug 2005 08:12:30 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 15:29:39 -0700, "Bill Bonde ('by a commodius vicus of recirculation')"
<spaceghoast@coasttocoast.co.uk> wrote:
Apostate wrote:
On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 11:32:11 -0700, "Bill Bonde ('by a commodius vicus of recirculation')"
<spaceghoast@coasttocoast.co.uk> wrote:
I'm not exactly sure what "neo-con" means but I'm pretty sure it isn't a
term to refer to Conservative Christian. I had thought that it referred
to folks who were formerly Liberals, that's the 'neo' part, and who had
changed to Conservative, the 'con' part. It seems now to have morphed
into just a code word for anyone a Liberal hates.
The fundamental question is: who has the right to Terry Schiavo's life?
Her parents, or she, herself, as entrusted to her next-of-kin to oversee?
Of course what is "next of kin" but someone's parents when the spouse is
shacked up with someone else with two babies?
WTF are you kidding, besides yourself?
Next of kin is a term of art in *law*, not your idle fantasies of infantile omnipotence.
It's fixed before a patient *goes into the hospital.*
It can be litigated to force an adjustment, and that was done extremely extensively
in this case. On the strength of a few punchy words meant to appeal to the emotions
of the dumber groundlings, you can't redefine that, like it or not.
That issue was extensively litigated.
The problem is that Terri Schiavo could not speak and we were left with
the husband who seemed to have ulterior motives,
Your idle armchair opinion can't trump the state's extensive court review of those issues.
namely that he wanted
Terri out of the way so he wouldn't be bothered with his new family.
Unsubstantiated ad hominem argument used in a campaign of innuendo to sway nitwits.
Those who are tortured by a philosophical qualm about a resolution against their instincts
aren't legally entitled to upset that, merely in service of their religious feelings.
Why can't you stop bringing up "religion"?
I didn't. shrub, among a passel of others, did, without daring to use the word.
"Starved to death" is a red herring (which she couldn't have eaten, anyway.)
She was fed by gavage. That isn't anything heroic, it's even used to
feed geese.
You aren't going to argue your way to redefining medico-legal settled matters on Usenet.
If she'd permitted feeding and hydration in perpetuam until her heart stopped, you'd have
had your way with her, but she didn't. Nor you.
Her legally enforceable command was that she should not be forced into being
someone else's meat-puppet after her capacity to live as a human was gone.
That was not written anywhere. That was a claimed statement by her
husband, the one that seemed to be motivated by his desire to get rid of
Schiavo.
The court, remember? You don't get to overrule its findings, arrived at after endless
litigation.
Conservatives, unfortunately including her traitorous family, sought to impose
a post-mortem intervention "for her own good" against her expressed wishes.
Traitorous family? Everyone but the husband, who wanted to marry the
women he'd replaced Terri with, wanted to keep Terri alive.
Against her expressed wishes, after her death as a human being, leaving the least shell
left running for them to disrespect by making her their dolly.
--
/Apostate
alt.atheist #1931 I've found it!
BAAWA Knife AND SMASHer
EAC Supernumerary Deputy Director, Department of Redundancy Department
plonked by Lani_girl, first post; Billions Served!
I doubt, therefore I might be.
e-mail to lower-case only
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Well Done" |
|
| Title: Re: Sheehan vs Shiavo... |
19 Aug 2005 04:09:48 PM |
|
|
Ian Chesterton <ichesterton@spfd.com> wrote:
You need to understand the politics of religious and political
conservatism to comprehend why sides have been taken here.
<snip>
You need to demonstrate that you understand ANYTHING before you can
explain it to others.
The only think the Sheehan and Shiavo cases have in common is their
names both start with "S". Otherwise, your analysis is a fucking
joke!
--
): "I may make you feel, but I can't make you think" :(
(: Off the monitor, through the modem, nothing but net :)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Cheeks _" |
|
| Title: Re: Sheehan vs Shiavo... |
17 Aug 2005 01:45:45 PM |
|
|
Ian Chesterton wrote:
Gary DeWaay wrote:
Could someone explain to me why one mother is vilified by righties, and
the other was embraced?
You need to understand the politics of religious and political
conservatism to comprehend why sides have been taken here. As a
moderate conservative myself, I was duped by the fundies into supporting
Terry Schiavo's cause, which also meant I was supporting her mother as
well. Once the autopsy results were released and many of us, including
Senator Mel Martinez, realized that the husband had been correct all
along and that most of what the fundies had been telling us was untrue,
I think alot of support for the religious conservatives was lost, or at
least I hope it was. Cindy Sheehan is another matter. This is more
about political conservatism, and were Bush a Democrat and Sheehan a
Republican, I have little doubt that the Democrats would be villifying
her just as the Republicans are doing to her now. It's sad, but it's
politics.
Does this mean you will eventually admit that George W. Bush
was a blatant liar and started the illegal war in Iraq on
false information?
--
"Now, Senator, I gave my heart and soul to oppose the policy that you
promoted. I gave my political life's blood to try to stop the mass
killing of Iraqis
by the sanctions on Iraq which killed one million Iraqis, most of them
children, most of them died before they even knew that they were Iraqis,
but they
died for no other reason other than that they were Iraqis with the
misfortune to born at that time. I gave my heart and soul to stop you
committing the
disaster that you did commit in invading Iraq. And I told the world that
your case for the war was a pack of lies.
“I told the world that Iraq, contrary to your claims did not have
weapons of mass destruction. I told the world, contrary to your claims,
that Iraq had no
connection to al-Qaeda. I told the world, contrary to your claims, that
Iraq had no connection to the atrocity on 9/11 2001. I told the world,
contrary to
your claims, that the Iraqi people would resist a British and American
invasion of their country and that the fall of Baghdad would not be the
beginning of
the end, but merely the end of the beginning.
"Senator, in everything I said about Iraq, I turned out to be right and
you turned out to be wrong and 100,000 people paid with their lives;
1600 of them
American soldiers sent to their deaths on a pack of lies; 15,000 of them
wounded, many of them disabled forever on a pack of lies.
"If the world had listened to Kofi Annan, whose dismissal you demanded,
if the world had listened to President Chirac who you want to paint as
some kind of
corrupt traitor, if the world had listened to me and the anti-war
movement in Britain, we would not be in the disaster that we are in
today. Senator, this
is the mother of all smokescreens. You are trying to divert attention
from the crimes that you supported, from the theft of billions of
dollars of Iraq's
wealth.
"Have a look at the real Oil-for-Food scandal. Have a look at the 14
months you were in charge of Baghdad, the first 14 months when $8.8
billion of Iraq's
wealth went missing on your watch. Have a look at Haliburton and other
American corporations that stole not only Iraq's money, but the money of the
American taxpayer.
"Have a look at the oil that you didn't even meter, that you were
shipping out of the country and selling, the proceeds of which went who
knows where? Have
a look at the $800 million you gave to American military commanders to
hand out around the country without even counting it or weighing it.
"Have a look at the real scandal breaking in the newspapers today,
revealed in the earlier testimony in this committee. That the biggest
sanctions busters
were not me or Russian politicians or French politicians. The real
sanctions busters were your own companies with the connivance of your
own Government."
-British MP George Galloway, Senate testimony, May 16, 2005
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Bonde by a commodius vicus of" |
|
| Title: Re: Sheehan vs Shiavo... |
17 Aug 2005 01:43:45 PM |
|
|
Cheeks wrote:
Does this mean you will eventually admit that George W. Bush
was a blatant liar and started the illegal war in Iraq on
false information?
What makes the Iraq war "illegal" and the Balkans war that Clinton got
us in not "illegal"?
--
"And he did bring them. It took a number of years, but one by one he
brought them here. Except for his father, that old man died where he was
born." -+ "Elia Kazan, "America, America"
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cheeks _" |
|
| Title: Re: Sheehan vs Shiavo... |
18 Aug 2005 01:09:59 PM |
|
|
Bill Bonde ('by a commodius vicus of recirculation') wrote:
Cheeks wrote:
Does this mean you will eventually admit that George W. Bush
was a blatant liar and started the illegal war in Iraq on
false information?
What makes the Iraq war "illegal" and the Balkans war that Clinton got
us in not "illegal"?
You tell me, Bonde. I never asserted any such thing
myself.
--
"Now, Senator, I gave my heart and soul to oppose the policy that you
promoted. I gave my political life's blood to try to stop the mass
killing of Iraqis
by the sanctions on Iraq which killed one million Iraqis, most of them
children, most of them died before they even knew that they were Iraqis,
but they
died for no other reason other than that they were Iraqis with the
misfortune to born at that time. I gave my heart and soul to stop you
committing the
disaster that you did commit in invading Iraq. And I told the world that
your case for the war was a pack of lies.
“I told the world that Iraq, contrary to your claims did not have
weapons of mass destruction. I told the world, contrary to your claims,
that Iraq had no
connection to al-Qaeda. I told the world, contrary to your claims, that
Iraq had no connection to the atrocity on 9/11 2001. I told the world,
contrary to
your claims, that the Iraqi people would resist a British and American
invasion of their country and that the fall of Baghdad would not be the
beginning of
the end, but merely the end of the beginning.
"Senator, in everything I said about Iraq, I turned out to be right and
you turned out to be wrong and 100,000 people paid with their lives;
1600 of them
American soldiers sent to their deaths on a pack of lies; 15,000 of them
wounded, many of them disabled forever on a pack of lies.
"If the world had listened to Kofi Annan, whose dismissal you demanded,
if the world had listened to President Chirac who you want to paint as
some kind of
corrupt traitor, if the world had listened to me and the anti-war
movement in Britain, we would not be in the disaster that we are in
today. Senator, this
is the mother of all smokescreens. You are trying to divert attention
from the crimes that you supported, from the theft of billions of
dollars of Iraq's
wealth.
"Have a look at the real Oil-for-Food scandal. Have a look at the 14
months you were in charge of Baghdad, the first 14 months when $8.8
billion of Iraq's
wealth went missing on your watch. Have a look at Haliburton and other
American corporations that stole not only Iraq's money, but the money of the
American taxpayer.
"Have a look at the oil that you didn't even meter, that you were
shipping out of the country and selling, the proceeds of which went who
knows where? Have
a look at the $800 million you gave to American military commanders to
hand out around the country without even counting it or weighing it.
"Have a look at the real scandal breaking in the newspapers today,
revealed in the earlier testimony in this committee. That the biggest
sanctions busters
were not me or Russian politicians or French politicians. The real
sanctions busters were your own companies with the connivance of your
own Government."
-British MP George Galloway, Senate testimony, May 16, 2005
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sean C" |
|
| Title: Re: Sheehan vs Shiavo... |
17 Aug 2005 12:51:33 PM |
|
|
In article <MPG.1d6c9101200bf5198a4a7@news.midco.net>, Gary DeWaay
<dewaay2spikeNOT@sio.midco.net> wrote:
Could someone explain to me why one mother is vilified by righties, and
the other was embraced?
Because Terri Schiavo fully supported everything the righties did on
her "behalf"; after all, we never heard her say she didn't.
Sean C
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Sheehan vs Shiavo... |
17 Aug 2005 07:49:06 AM |
|
|
In episode <MPG.1d6c9101200bf5198a4a7@news.midco.net>, Gary DeWaay burst
into the room and exclaimed:
Could someone explain to me why one mother is vilified by righties, and
the other was embraced?
Because opposing The Party is by definition evil.
Terry Schiavo just laid there and didn't get uppity. She made a good
symbol because she couldn't talk back...
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
Alt-atheism website at: http://www.alt-atheism.org
--------------------------------------------------
"Come to think of it, there are already a million
monkeys on a million typewriters, and the Usenet
is NOTHING like Shakespeare!" -- Blair Houghton
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Sheehan vs Shiavo... |
22 Aug 2005 04:02:42 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 07:49:06 -0500, "Mark K. Bilbo"
<alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote:
In episode <MPG.1d6c9101200bf5198a4a7@news.midco.net>, Gary DeWaay burst
into the room and exclaimed:
Could someone explain to me why one mother is vilified by righties, and
the other was embraced?
Because opposing The Party is by definition evil.
Terry Schiavo just laid there and didn't get uppity. She made a good
symbol because she couldn't talk back...
She would have also been the perfect Christian Brood Mare®.
Mindlessly generating offspring via automatic functions if that was
what her husband wanted.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
"As democracy is perfected, the office of president
represents, more and more closely, the inner soul
of the people. On some great and glorious day the
plain folks of the land will reach their heart's
desire at last and the White House will be adorned
by a downright moron." --- H.L. Mencken (1880 - 1956)
Religion is the original war crime.
-Michelle Malkin (Feb 26, 2005)
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Sheehan vs Shiavo... |
20 Aug 2005 05:24:23 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 01:11:23 -0500, Gary DeWaay
<dewaay2spikeNOT@sio.midco.net> wrote:
Could someone explain to me why one mother is vilified by righties, and
the other was embraced?
Divine Plan®
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
"As democracy is perfected, the office of president
represents, more and more closely, the inner soul
of the people. On some great and glorious day the
plain folks of the land will reach their heart's
desire at last and the White House will be adorned
by a downright moron." --- H.L. Mencken (1880 - 1956)
Religion is the original war crime.
-Michelle Malkin (Feb 26, 2005)
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
