GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum - View Single Post - Bush: "We in government have a duty to protect the weak, disabled and vulnerable,"

Bladewire · 03-21-2005, 10:08 AM

TIMELINE:

1999

Texas Gov. George W. Bush signed into law The Futile Care Statute which allows doctors the right to remove life support against the wishes of the parents of a patient, even children, due to the statutes changes in the TX health and safety codes Chapter 166

In 2003

FL Gov. Jeb Bush forced legislation titled "Terri?s Law" Which gave Jeb Bush the right to reinstate a patients feeding tube. The Florida supreme court found Jeb Bush breached separation of powers and the law was found unconstitutional.

Jan 2005

Supreme court refuses to hear Schiavo case.

March 16, 2005

For the first time in U.S. history life support was removed from a pediatric patient against the wishes of the parents. Why? Because of the legislation president George W. Bush signed into law in 1999 (see above) Coverage of the story 1 2 3

March 21, 2005

Bush pushes bill through to force the Federal court to hear the Schiavo case. Stating "..our laws and our courts should have a presumption in favor of life." Huh???

19 judges, in six different courts, over the last 15 years, have had numerous court appointed medical experts testify in the Schiavo case stating she's a vegetable. ALL JUDGES ruled in favor of Mr. Schiavo and his right to fulfill his wife?s wishes. Today Mr. Schindler was quoted as saying "All I want is a chance at a fair trial for my daughter" Huh???

Why is it that 6 days after the first child in U.S. history was taken off life support, against the parents wishes, because of legislation president Bush passed, we now see Bush going against the ruling of 19 judges and the non interest of the supreme court, to now force a Federal judge to hear a case where Bush hopes for the patient to live in honor of the parents wishes, even though they are not the guardians & have no legal rights?

Can someone explain why this is happening and why the coverage of Schiavo is out shadowing the coverage of this baby that was killed because of legislation Bush passed? Did anyone even know this baby died solely because of Bush's legislation?

I like the quote on this blog "George W. Bush: bioethical flip flopper. He passes laws while governor of Texas, allowing hospitals to kill children against the wishes of the parents (without adjudication by the courts, btw) and then, as president, sanctimoniously fights a culture war under the pretext of a 'culture of life.' "

03-21-2005, 10:08 AM
Bladewire StraightBro Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Monarch Beach, CA USA Posts: 56,229	Bush: "We in government have a duty to protect the weak, disabled and vulnerable," TIMELINE: 1999 Texas Gov. George W. Bush signed into law The Futile Care Statute which allows doctors the right to remove life support against the wishes of the parents of a patient, even children, due to the statutes changes in the TX health and safety codes Chapter 166 In 2003 FL Gov. Jeb Bush forced legislation titled "Terri?s Law" Which gave Jeb Bush the right to reinstate a patients feeding tube. The Florida supreme court found Jeb Bush breached separation of powers and the law was found unconstitutional. Jan 2005 Supreme court refuses to hear Schiavo case. March 16, 2005 For the first time in U.S. history life support was removed from a pediatric patient against the wishes of the parents. Why? Because of the legislation president George W. Bush signed into law in 1999 (see above) Coverage of the story 1 2 3 March 21, 2005 Bush pushes bill through to force the Federal court to hear the Schiavo case. Stating "..our laws and our courts should have a presumption in favor of life." Huh??? 19 judges, in six different courts, over the last 15 years, have had numerous court appointed medical experts testify in the Schiavo case stating she's a vegetable. ALL JUDGES ruled in favor of Mr. Schiavo and his right to fulfill his wife?s wishes. Today Mr. Schindler was quoted as saying "All I want is a chance at a fair trial for my daughter" Huh??? Why is it that 6 days after the first child in U.S. history was taken off life support, against the parents wishes, because of legislation president Bush passed, we now see Bush going against the ruling of 19 judges and the non interest of the supreme court, to now force a Federal judge to hear a case where Bush hopes for the patient to live in honor of the parents wishes, even though they are not the guardians & have no legal rights? Can someone explain why this is happening and why the coverage of Schiavo is out shadowing the coverage of this baby that was killed because of legislation Bush passed? Did anyone even know this baby died solely because of Bush's legislation? I like the quote on this blog "George W. Bush: bioethical flip flopper. He passes laws while governor of Texas, allowing hospitals to kill children against the wishes of the parents (without adjudication by the courts, btw) and then, as president, sanctimoniously fights a culture war under the pretext of a 'culture of life.' "