now that she's dead, who cares? Schiavo-inspired bills lose momentum

[KG]

in Congress.

While defending their actions to keep the woman alive, lawmakers show little zeal for broader legislation.

By ANITA KUMAR, Times Staff Writer
Published April 7, 2005

WASHINGTON - Just about two weeks ago, when Congress passed a hastily written bill meant to prolong Terri Schiavo's life, they vowed to consider the needs of other incapacitated people later this session.

But as lawmakers began debating broader legislation Wednesday, the enthusiasm that brought Congress back from vacation for a midnight vote on Palm Sunday had conspicuously waned.

Leaders offered no proclamations of support of a new bill. Two senators - the bare minimum needed - showed up for the first hearing at the Capitol. Nobody talked about working overtime to hammer out a compromise.

MORE>>> http://www.stpetersburgtimes.com/2005/04/07/Worldandnation/Schiavo_inspired_bill.shtml

****

gee, who didn't see this coming?

[opihimoimoi]

1. What is it about us that we save our WEAK and risk our STRONG?

Nature will not tolerate this very much longer...

[Kerrytravelers]

2. If this is a cause they soooooOOOOOoooooo beleive in,

they would continue pushing the issue. Just goes to show what we already know. It was all political.

[The Backlash Cometh]

3. So...it wasn't about the right to life afterall?

[Old and In the Way]

4. Funny how Republican 'values" work.

It's only important if they can score political points.

[Pithlet]

5. I'm so shocked.

Who could have predicted that?

It was so painfully transparent that the politicians involved blatantly used Mrs. Schiavo and her family in an attempt to appease their base. Fresh air is opaque by comparison.

[kskiska]

6. Now these guys are beginning to show their hand

Schiavo Case: Living Wills, Autopsy Not the Answer, Says Fr. Pavone of Priests for Life

(snip)

"In response to the Schiavo case, many think they should draw up a living will. This, however, is both unnecessary and dangerous. We cannot make treatment decisions today for circumstances of tomorrow that we cannot predict. Whether a medical treatment is morally required depends on those circumstances and therefore cannot be determined in advance. It is always morally required, moreover, to provide food and water to a patient, because food and water, even when provided artificially, do not constitute medical treatment but rather humane care. We are not morally permitted to request starvation and dehydration.

"In regard to the autopsy of Terri Schiavo, the results -- whatever they may show -- are irrelevant to the moral judgment that she was murdered. The level of brain damage that she had can never justify what was done to her. Life does not lose its value and dignity when it is damaged."

more…
http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=45487