Gay Marriage, Schiavo link....say what???

Heard it here first (I think). Was talking to a buddy at work on the phone and the whole Terri thing came up. Without going into all the gory details, here was his summation:

"Well it's real simple now, marriage is whatever you decide you want it to be, and so her husband being her husband really means nothing, her parents are just as entitled if not more so to say what should happen"


And this went on and on for a few. Yeah I rebutted, but that was like smacking my head into a wall.

So here is what we face - twisted weird logic which you cannot argue with because it does not make sense in the first place. And no, the guy is not a fundie, just a bushbot who thinks the left wants to run his life (uhhh ok...but yeah, he has said that many times).

Good luck trying to get these people to see the light....

everything is for the gay agenda---after 2004, the Pukes realized their best bet was to link everything they are against with the 'gay agenda'

Some I've talked to about the case said since the husband moved on (never mind the parents said it was okay) he destroyed his marriage in God's eyes and all that even though Terri is dead. :eyes: Schiavo is the "scumbag" who is cheating on his wife in their eyes. Never mind what the law says and that she's dead.

I'm totally confused by this

so it's the fault of those who want same sex marriage that her husband removed the feeding tubes

If Terri Schiavo was a gay woman, her partner would have no say in whether she should or should not continue on life support. Recognizing gay marriage doesn't make marriage less important, it gives it the significance it deserves.

onenote

How can it be the gays' fault if they already said Clinton is to blame?

It is like dealing with the insane at times. 2+2=whatever the hell we can make it equal.

I need a drink, maybe then it will start making sense. But I really doubt a trip around the bay with captain morgan will make it any more reasonable :)

cells than that.
Try a lobotomy. (it seems to work for them-only downside is there's no coming back)
:evilgrin:

other people; but if that individual were put in the same circumstance, you can darn well bet he'd be pissed as hell that the government is inserting itself into his decision-making.

That's what gets me most about trying to have a disussion with these people. Ask them, "What if it were you?" and it's not possible for the scenario to enter their heads....only with someone else. Cognitive dissonance.

We make decisions about your life, but ours is not subjected to it. We have health care, but you can go suck eggs, and so on and so forth. That to me is a problem with a government that gets too big and too powerful - too few can make the many miserable, while they themselves are out of touch with the reality of the rest of us.

So when it suits THEIR purposes, they just PRETEND that we won on the gay marriage issue and use it to abuse the powers of Congress and violate state's rights (the rights of state courts to decide cases)?

WHAT THE FUCK?

if Terri woke up completely healed, what happens to her husband? He's shacked up with some lady for 10 years, he has other kids and he wasn't at her side, even though he signed a legal agreement that states until DEATH do us part AND better/worse. Why is it he can toss aside marriage vows while his sick wife lay in a vegetative state?
Isn't that considered abandonment on her part and grounds for a divorce if Michael wanted one? Do you think she'd want Michael back with the whole different life he's been leading? So Repugs are trapped with this one...how can they say marriage is sacred when they allow people like Michael to basically marry two people. He's either 1) committing adultery, which must be legal in Florida otherwise no one has forced the issue
2) if there was common law marriage, his mistress or whatever would be legally justified to any of his assets in Florida and Terri's for that matter if they still have common assets
3) He has grounds to divorce Terri for wife abandonment since she is not available to him on any level
4) why does he get to be in a marriage that is basically a sham and no marriage at all, AND he gets to make life or death decisions based on a lie of a marriage to a person that may not want him to make any ethical decisions based on his unethical behavior?

Even GAY people can't make marriage look as bad as the Shiavo's have.

The marriage should be null and void. Therefore, custody would automatically fall into the parents hand and Terri can lay there for eternity as they pray for their miracle.

Meanwhile...the right wing hypocrites are still demanding death penalties for people with brain activity, yet any living entity that has no cognitive abilities, that's more precious life than the thinking and feeling. That's just FUCKED UP!

Michael Schiavo HAS been by Terri's side for 15 years. He has coordinated and provided for her care, and court records confirm he has done an exemplary job of it.

There is no common law marriage.

Being hospitalized is not "abandonment".

He gets to carry out her decisions because a) he is her legal husband and b) he was appointed by the court as her guardian.

of someone else.

If there were common law marriage, than wouldn't you agree that his mistress, or what do we call her, be eligible?

Being in a coma, vegetative state or any other unavailable state by medical reasons surely constitutes that you can summons for a divorce after a period of time? I'm not positive on this one, but I would think there's something in law that states a spouse can obtain a divorce if a persistent vegetative state was involved or mental incapacity?

This situation could certainly be grounds for divorce, but not on the grounds of abandonment.

And there is no common-law-wife, and nothing that negates the LEGAL contract of the Schiavo marriage.

a life separate of his other life. I think until death do you part is something to be honored, she's still existing on this earth. She's not dead yet. I just know, if I loved my partner, I would be there the whole way, but than again, I understand that no one would want to watch someone they loved deteriorate into an unrecognizable human being. It sucks no matter what and I think there's a lot of wasted energy on it, in fact, I'm bowing out of the discussion, after all, our great leader has condemned more people to death than he's ever saved in his lifetime. Count the death warrants he's signed, the military he's responsible for and the Afghans and Iraqi's he's looked the other way about. Nothing surrounds him but death, it's amazing his little sheep don't see what's in front of them. A man of contradictions, Bush is nothing but that. Either way anyone feels about this story, it's really no ones business but the people involved in my opinion.

Thanks for you insights and engaging me in some intelligent conversation, you gave me some things to think about.

Michael could have moved on in his other life if the Schindler Ghould had not prevented it.

And he is carrying out his final obligation to her, at great personal expense to himself.

If I were in Terri's spot I'd want my spouse to see it through with me but I'd also want him to have love and support in his own life apart from me.

He married the woman who he lived with for about 15 yrs. after she had a medical emergency while they were on vacation in FL a couple of years ago. Since they weren't married the hospital had to call her 2 adult children who had to drive to FL and sign any and all papers for her to consent to treatment. They were married by a judge on their lunch hour about 2 months after this episode. According to your friend they went to all of this trouble for nothing. :evilgrin:

to me, the major flaw is that it is the Right which demands that marriage be defined as a sanctity, and claims gays can't participate in things like health decisions in current next-of-kin laws because of that relationship sanctity that only a man and a woman can possess.

Now they are making a mini-industry out of trashing the husband of Terri Schiavo, devaluing his marriage, accusing him of everything from adultery to attempted murder - all the while seething that the State (er, or their version of the Church-state) has every right to arbitrarily dissolve ANY marriage in which an outsider determines one party has not met someone else's standards. In this respect, their argument is that there IS no sanctity of marriage and the entire network of next-of-kin laws is invalid if they disagree with the marriage.

Unfortunately, these are the same next-of-kin laws that have refused recognition of same-sex couples as even existing...so a third cousin can essentially make all of the legal decisions, whether they've seen you for 20 years or not. And they expect the courts to uphold that interpretation every time. Suddenly, however, they want those same laws tossed aside due to their own assertions that Michael Schiavo is an "unfit" husband, as if states customarily let outside groups demand a marriage be dissolved.

Believe me, gays are watching this with a mixture of awe and amazement. The very argument they have used in every state against our relationships is being used against heterosexuals. Except this time, I think a lot of Americans suddenly woke up.

The whole reason that gay couples want to get married like straight people do is so they can ahve the rights that straight married couples get.


One of which is making medical decisions for your spouse.



Unfortunately with those fools in congress trying to undermine this very right, it has becoem clear, that they don't want us to ahve rights at all, and it doesn't matter if you are straight or gay.


i don't think your friend ahs made the leap of logic to et here tho.