| Ya I'm a republican, and really I'm on both sides of the issue. I want smaller government, AND I'm for a lot of things people deem as "far right religious extremes".
First up, yes I think the governement is far too out of control big. Yes there are needs for some social programs. Look back at the late 1800s and up until the mid 1900s for your proof. However, as it stands right now, we've veered way too far the other way and things are just getting out of control. There is a happy medium somewhere in there and we as a nation really really have to quit reaching over the lines to just try to take swipes at each other and try to come up with a differant solution.
As far as the religion issues go, I want to able to PRACTICE my religion outside of church and home without fear of being arrested, harassed, or mistreated. No I do NOT want the ten commandments being taught in a public school (or any gov't funded entity), but the 1st Amendment does not say that I absolutely cannot bring a Bible with me to school, or have it seen. It's a very very sticky situation I know, but it's because unfortunately extremes on both sides have really muddled up things. If you are that so offended by even the sight of a Bible or someone praying, man you just need thicker skin and there is nothing that can be done to help your situation other than trampling on the rights of others.
As far as the Schaivo case, I understand the video could be edited and that's a good argument. On the other hand it could very easily be said that they are just exagerating her condition so the Husband can get out of this with money still in tact. If he loses his "guardianship" he loses the cash that is involved in this case. Her condition (I may be wrong) I believe was caused by a medical malpractice that had quite a reward attached to it. Of course he wants her to die, and he sure as hell does not want to sign all that money over to the parents who are more than willing to take care of her by letting them take over. Then you have a very heavy advocate of Euthenasia as a lawyer with is own agenda fighting for the husband. Not only that, as you have said this is a family matter, the problem is two very major portions of her family (her parents which gave her life in the first place, and her husband) are in complete disagreement. How else were they going to settle this?
To me this isn't so much a pro life / pro choice/right to die case as it is much as what standard are we going to be setting for the future. Our entire justice system, and to some extent the legal system (through supreme court challenges) is mostly based on precidences... and I just forsee this case being the first step towards one day having a government telling us when we are to die or not. Basically using the logic they've been shoving down on our throat for why the plug should be pulled on Teri... "Who wants to live like that?". Well, ok.... than we have a severely mentally handicappd person. Who wants to live like that? What is he contributing to society? He's not very productive... ok let's put him to sleep. THAT is what I want to avoid setting up our system to eventually be deciding.
On the Federal Gov't (Congress, Senate, White House) stepping in and trying to interfere... I'm not going to argue one way or the other on this case. The only thing that just bothers me, is I believe our court system is way out of balance and control. We in essance are ruled by nine unelected tyrants in black robes who serve until they die basically. I don't care what side of the isle you are on... that thought is just scary. I can live with a Democrat President and Congress and Senate. Even if it doesn't agree with me, I at least know the majority of the people are represented from their voice being heard in the ballot box. However, if nine men decide they don't like a law passed by the government for the people... they can just scrap it with no real fear of repercussion? I mean lets flip the coin here.
Lets say one day the Supreme Court gets 6 far right wingers that would make Pat Bucannon proud... and they decide it's unconstitional that Christianity is not allowed to be taught in our schools... There is absoultely NOTHING that can be done about that decision short of having another supreme court way way down the line try to reverse the decision. THere are checks in place that congress can use to deam if the courts are out of line to help keep the Court in check. I am really hoping congress starts using those tools to help balance this out. For over 150 years the courts were too far in the other way... CIvil Rights came around far far later than they should have because of the courts as one example. Now they are on another extreme that are in my mind just as unhealthy, and there is absolutely nothing we can do to stop it. To me that has got to change somehow, and someway. It won't be easy at all... nor do I even think it's possible at this point. Maybe we are just too divided as a nation. We can no longer compromise anything to get something done... |