My LTTE concerning Teri Schiavo and Bush was published today

[auburngrad82]

In the Durham (NC) Herald Sun:

http://www.heraldsun.com/opinion/hsletters/

Bush contradicted himself with Terri's Law

Who's life is worth more, a white woman whose father contributes to GOP candidates or a young black infant? George Bush this week signed "Terri's Law" to prolong the life of Terri Schiavo when he had previously signed a Texas law that allowed doctors to discontinue life support against the will of the family.

Six-month-old Sun Hudson had his feeding tube removed against his parents' will after Bush signed the Texas law into action.

The big difference here? Terri's parents are white, GOP supporters. Sun's parents are African American and are not wealthy. It's unfortunate that our government enacts laws for individuals when they should be looking at what is best for all of our citizens. If Bush and the GOP were acting responsibly rather than chasing campaign contributions and votes, the Schiavo case would have never made it out of state court.

It's a states' rights case, plain and simple.

[NMDemDist2]

1. well done! n/t

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

2. Bravo!

the plight of Sun Hudson and his parents should be told again and again. Thanks for a well written letter-let's hope it makes some North Carolinians sit up and take notice.

[caledesi]

3. Excellent! Can see why they published it. nt

[matcom]

4. rediculous argument IMHO

that baby SHOULD have been taken off life support. if you know the story, every doctor said he would NEVER live. he shouldn't frankly have even survived birth. the mother was deranged to boot.

i HATE this argument because i would be even MORE pissed in dimson had stepped in in that case.

its a bullshit argument

again, IMHO only

[Rainbowreflect]

6. I agree with you that the baby should have been taken off

life support, but I still think it is a good argument because it shows their hypocrisy.

[HarrietBrown]

7. I agree--whether the baby should have gone off support earlier

is not really the point in this case--the point is that if they say a life is a life is a life--then why wasn't that baby's life considered worthy of saving (or Iraqi babies' lives, or soldiers' lives or death row inmates' lives, or kids starving to death lives--etc. etc.) They put themselves in an impossible position because they can say that they "value all life" but they can't possibly prove it.

[OneTwentyoNine]

10. Where did he say that baby shouldn't have been taken off??

He never said that once in his LTTE,he just brought up the FUCKING hypocrisy and the fact that Terri is nothing more than a political chess piece to the GOP.

He got in some good points against Bush and his Nazis in a Newspaper and all you can do is trash him and his supposed "bullshit argument"??

Real proud to be a DU'er this morning.....

[Jersey Devil]

5. Excellent job - bravo

Thank you for helping us get our voices heard.

[underpants]

8. I like it but..

While the "after Bush signed the Texas law into action" is accurate it could be seen as a bit inaccurate. Oh well their whole case is based on inaccuracies and left out information.

[katinmn]

9. Good job of pointing out the hypocrisy

:thumbsup: