Pro-life groups are condemning Democratic presidential frontrunner Barack Obama for saying that his biggest regret in his political career was supporting the right of the parents of brain-damaged Terri Schiavo to appeal in a federal court to keep her alive by sustaining her feeding tube.
The comment came during a debate Tuesday night when MSNBC moderator Tim Russert asked Obama and Sen. Hillary Clinton whether there was “any word or vote that you’d like to take back” in your “careers in public service.” Clinton had responded that she regretted her vote authorizing the war in Iraq, while Obama wanted to take back his 2005 vote regarding the Terry Schiavo case.
Obama said it was a “mistake” for Congress “to interject itself into that decision-making process of the families” to settle her fate.
Terri Schiavo’s husband and legal guardian had for years battled with Schiavo’s parents in Florida courts over pulling her feeding tube and essentially allowing her to die of starvation and dehydration. He contends that his wife had told him before her accident that she would not want to live in such a condition.
But Schiavo’s parents had called her husband’s motives into question by pointing out that he was living with a girlfriend whom he fathered two children with.
After emotional debates in Congress that set the country in an moral uproar, it was decided unanimously that her parents could bring the case to a federal court since they had exhausted the legal options within Florida state.
"It wasn't something I was comfortable with, but it was not something that I stood on the floor and stopped," Obama said during the debate. "And I think that was a mistake, and I think the American people understood that that was a mistake. And as a constitutional law professor, I knew better.... And I think that's an example of inaction, and sometimes that can be as costly as action."
Obama had been in the Senate less than two months when the vote took place.
Robert Schindler, Terri’s father, criticized Obama’s remark about regretting his decision in the Schiavo case.
"Everyone with a disability, or who knows someone with a disability, should be outraged that a potential U.S. president would so callously reject his own action taken in favor of life over death," Schinder said in a statement. "Highly visible public figures, especially those who may one day speak on behalf of all citizens, should not imply that some citizens are less worthy than others. As President, would Barack Obama stand for all of us or just some of us?"
Meanwhile, Bill Donohue, president of Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, highlighted that the vote was “merely procedural” and the bill was “case specific” and had no “bearing on any case other than Schiavo’s.”
Donohue went on to note that Obama did not say that he regretted his vote against a bill in the Illinois legislature that would provide medical care to infants who survive abortions. Also, the pro-life leader criticized Obama for not regretting his opposition to a bill that would mandate health care for a baby who survived an abortion.
"In conclusion, Senator Obama thinks it is none of the federal government's business to allow doctors to intentionally starve a person to death, nor is it the law's business to require doctors to attend to the health care of a fully born baby who has survived an abortion,” Donohue said. “All this from the Minister of Hope." Continue >>
Comments
anniefourjesus "Every human life is sacred; each human being uniquely designed, God makes no copies or clones and each life is precious and deserving of dignity."
I see some serious quality control problems with a lot of humans- low IQ, deformities, childhood cancers, mental illness, autism.....etc. Not much dignity there
Every human life is sacred; each human being uniquely designed, God makes no copies or clones and each life is precious and deserving of dignity.
Since God is the Creator, HE and HE alone determines our final outcome; who is anyone to say that one life is not valuable, simply because they are disabled or embroyo.
This is the Presidency of our Nation; I do not want anyone at the head of our nation who thinks so little of any life...will you be the next one that is not valuable. None of us knows if we might not go into a coma, and many have by a miracle come out of that coma. Many medical breakthroughs are happening, cancer is one case in point, many are surviving and thriving from cancer.
You think about this; what if this were your child, mother, brother or sister; someone that you knew and loved; you might not think this was so Ok!
I pray for this man Obama, that God will open his ears to hear the message that he is sending out. I have seen this man's fruit, and his voting record; which is pretty much non-existent. He's only been in office 2 years; he has no experience as far as I am concerned.
Mr. Obama, we care about all our people, especially for those who cannot speak or care for themselves, for one day that person may be you sir!
God help our nation!
This is probably the closest I will come to agreeing with people on this site, but it's a start. I wholly agree with those of you who refer to the autopsy results to show that she was functionally brain dead and in no way capable of recovering. HOWEVER, I still feel uneasy with the husband being allowed to be appointed at guardian for her and his being the person to decide whether or not to remove the feeding tube. Clearly his loyalty to his wife was in question. Outside of the $ issue, he had an interest in Terry dying insomuch as it allowed him to remarry and continue his life. I would have much rather the parents been the ones to make the decision. If only they had the full information regarding the state of her brain. Then again, it's a hard sell to tell a parent that there is no hope left for their child...
Obama: Sermon on the Mount Supports Same-sex Unions
On the campaign trail yesterday, Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) defended his support of abortion and same-sex unions. In response to a question at a stop at Hocking College in Nelsonville, Ohio, Obama said he does not support calling same-sex unions marriage, but thinks same-sex couples should be given the recognition and benefits granted to married couples. "I think that it is a legal right that they [homosexuals] should have that is recognized by the state. If people find that controversial then I would just refer them to the Sermon on the Mount, which I think is, in my mind, for my faith, more central than an obscure passage in Romans." Jesus teaches on a number of issues central to the Christian life in the Sermon on the Mount: being witnesses to the world, loving our enemies, honoring marriage - but there is no instruction on same-sex unions. As for St. Paul's writing in Romans, it is distinguished not by its obscurity but by its clarity and consistency with all of Christian teaching about the nature of sexuality and marriage. Paul writes: "They [the unrighteous] exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator - who is forever praised. Amen. Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion." (Romans 1:24-27, NIV) Obama also told the crowd that his support of abortion (he voted against banning partial-birth abortion, and against notifying the parents of minors prior to their having an abortion) and his support of same-sex unions do not make him "less of a Christian." -FRC
Obama... oh my God that Obama. McCain is getting whitehouse this year... he really is. If Obama gets nominated then the Dems will hate him, if Hillary gets nominated not a SINGLE republican will vote for her and she will be left with the white female feminist and husband vote. Seriously, the only reason Hillary made it this far was because the feminist pro-choice vote carried her so far. She is going to be smashed if she is nominated.
Ad hominem attacks only lowers the level of dialogue on this forum. How unfortunate it is.
Testimonial evidence from Terri's family and medical evaluations from a neurophysiologist, which contradict the mainstream media view, are equally valid as facts. There is much evidence not reported that the general public is unaware of. Go to "Terri's Foundation" to unearth the mounds of evidence that was ignored by the Federal Circuit Court judges.
"Worldview" has everything to do with it, more than many of us will ever realize. Those who have studied the concepts would be quite familiar with it. Those who are not familiar with it, can deny it, until the cows come home, but it doesn't change the foundation of the worldview propping up one's interpretation of the facts. We all have a worldview, whether we realize it or not. It's existence has a significant influence in how we interpret the so-called "facts."
Sorry, squeaky, but "worldview" has nothing to do with it. Released with the autopsy results were some CT scans from three years prior to death that showed "massive" loss of cerebral cortex tissue. Terry was a collection of cells with no chance of ever recovering.
Facts are facts, why can't you except them even when they are incontrovertible? I hate to keep banging away, I feel like I'm dealing with a child.
Of course, if you concede that Terry was not an example of human life, then you also concede that blastocysts aren't either. Pretty soon it all becomes a house-of-cards, doesn't it?
Terri Schiavo's autopsy has some limited value. Let's remember that the autopsy is only a "snapshot" picture of the state of her body after days of government mandated dehydration and starvation. We do not have a "video" capture of the state of her body throughout the years, months, weeks or even final days leading to her eventual death.
Therefore, it is not possible to definitively create retro-causation from the autopsy results. ie: "Since the autopsy brain is in a small, dehydrated state, this proves that she was in a persistent, vegatative state." Such a conclusion cannot be drawn. As mentioned in another post, many other possible factors could have led to the small dehydrated size of the brain. Namely, dehydration and starvation in the final days. The presence of a small dehydrated brain at death does not prove the existence of such a brain in the identical condition at such time frame of one week or one month or one year or five years earlier.
This dialogue reveals the deep dividing divergent views due to the differences in worldviews and the nature of man and God. It is ultimately a significant battle between the Christian worldview vs. postmodernism. We cannot expect a person from a postmodern worldview to even begin to comprehend the infinite human worth of a disabled Terri Schiavo. It takes the working of the Holy Spirit to open such eyes!
CP2008
"Is it ok with you that we are now allowing disabled human beings to be starved and dehydrated by withholding their sustenance – food and water – the same two essentials that you and I need to sustain life?
Would it be ok with you to starve and dehydrate a dog until they die?"
Actually the humane thing to do would be a lethal injection. Thats what we do with our pets at the end of their lives. We show humanity towards our pets, but not towards humans- we require them to suffer painful deaths. For me, I would want the option of lethal injection to end my life if I had a painful terminal illness. Euthansia should be up to the individual, not the church and not the government.
"I feel very bad that both of you have been given misinformation about the Terri Schiavo case. Have either of you researched reasons for her brain being shrunk,"
Hampsteadpete wanted to answer, but he has been barred from this site for expressing opposing views, I guess, like most of the other non-theists, so I will answer for him.
Misinformation? Every doctor who examined the poor girl gave the same diagnosis, and it was absolutely confirmed by the autopsy. There was no "life" there as we know it, she was being kept alive by machines with no hope of any sort of recovery.
In 2003, I had to make a similar call on my own Mother, and I wouldn't wish it on anyone, but it is a part of life. I hope none of you ever have to do anything like that with a loved one.
I really don't know what the disagreement is here. Is it with the diagnosis? The autopsy results? Do any of you really believe that Terry had any chance of recovery? The conflicts of interest one of you mentioned, even if they existed, were irrelevant given the overwhelming weight of medical evidence that Terry was dead, for all intents and purposes. Do you think we should keep people alive forever even without hope of recovery?
CP2008: Terry was not "disabled," she was in a persistent vegetative state. That is not my diagnosis, but the diagnosis of every competent physician who actually bothered to examine her. As I said above, I hope you never have to make this call.
Sadly, the response I received from my earlier post was just about what I expected. Scientific evidence, as usual, is of no consequence to those of you who would prefer to believe hysterical talk-radio hosts. I was going to ask how anyone could look at the autopsy results and draw any other conclusion, then I thought about the mountains of evidence of evolution, and decided not to bother.
HampsteadPete,
Let’s say that you are right, that Terri Schiavo was not capable of doing the things that you say.
In other words, she was disabled (severely).
Is it ok with you that we are now allowing disabled human beings to be starved and dehydrated by withholding their sustenance – food and water – the same two essentials that you and I need to sustain life?
Would it be ok with you to starve and dehydrate a dog until they die?
Respectfully, I would like to hear your thoughts.
Thank you.
Eles and Hampstead-
I feel very bad that both of you have been given misinformation about the Terri Schiavo case. Have either of you researched reasons for her brain being shrunk, such as the impact of dehydration on the brain, which is over 70 percent water? It is sad that the media has not given our country the information it needs to make truly informed decisions in these cases.
"The misconceptions about Terri Schiavo must be corrected. Terri was not in a comatose state; she was responsive to human voices; she was able to visually track with her eyes; she expressed emotions; she even cried tears. Terri was disabled."
The misconceptions that "must be corrected" are yours! As the below autopsy results clearly shows, she was simply not capable of any of the responses you mention. They existed only in the wishful thinking of her family.
Did you pay no attention to the autopsy results when they were published, or did you ignore them 'cause they didn't fit in with your prior convictions? Either way, you are wrong, dead wrong.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8225637/
Or do you think the results were somehow faked?
The misconceptions about Terri Schiavo must be corrected. Terri was not in a comatose state; she was responsive to human voices; she was able to visually track with her eyes; she expressed emotions; she even cried tears. Terri was disabled. She merely needed food and water to survive, as all of us do. Terri's guardian, Michael Schiavo, did not want to divorce Terri; instead, he had an affair with another woman & fathered another child. There are major conflicts of interest here. Michael, as Terri's guardian, should have been acting in the best interests of Terri. However, he also had ethical conflicts, being that he was in love with another woman. Meanwhile, there are ethical conflicts present, when a medical malpractice award for Terri's behalf was spent by Michael, not for Terri's physical rehab purposes but for legal fees purposes to pursue Terri's own death in court. All these questionable conflicts occurred while the media distorted the facts of the case. It's no wonder the public can be so uninformed and blindly parrotting the mainstream media sound bites.
Gee, a presidential candidate who actually admits mistakes! George Bush has been the worst president in history and has never admitted any of his gross errors. How refreshing! That Schiavo thing was America's dumbest hour. So many pandering politicians, it was hard to keep track of them all, and in the middle of it, our president flying in like Mighty Mouse to save the day.
My heart goes out to the family, but poor Terry had been, in nearly every sense of the word, dead for quite some time.