Monday, March 21, 2005


Sanctity of Marriage?

Let me get this straight - the Republican-led Congress and President Bush are supporting the wishes of the parents of Terry Schiavo, rather than the wishes of Terry's husband and life partner?

Rather than letting Terry's partner make the decisions that will affect his wife's life, President Bush signed legislation which would let the courts decide?

Let's rewind to January 2004, at the State of the Union, when President Bush was running for re-election, and found it convenient to state the following:

THE PRESIDENT: A strong America must also value the institution of marriage. I believe we should respect individuals as we take a principled stand for one of the most fundamental, enduring institutions of our civilization.... Our nation must defend the sanctity of marriage. (Applause.)

How about October of 2003, when Bush declared:

NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim the week of October 12 through October 18, 2003, as Marriage Protection Week.

How about when he stated that "I will work with congressional leaders and others to do what is legally necessary to defend the sanctity of marriage."

Is this involvement in the Schiavo case what they had in mind when the Administration paid syndicated columnist Maggie Gallagher $21,500 to write columns supporting the sanctity of marriage?

If Congress wants to take on issues of morality, life, and death, perhaps they should look at the deaths they have facilitated by their lack of a true policy of health care for Americans.

Posted by FleshPresser at 11:36 AM /

8 Comments

  • Anonymous Anonymous posted at 12:54 PM  
    EXACTLY! I wrote a similar blog this weekend...I can't believe such a fanatically pro-marriage administration would so quickly abandon marriage rights. It's hypocrisy at its worst.

  • Blogger FleshPresser posted at 1:37 PM  
    And a damned fine post it is... for those of you reading here, check out ModFab's post at http://modernfabulousity.blogspot.com/2005/03/terry-schiavo.html

  • Blogger BionicChick3 posted at 2:49 PM  
    FleshPresser ~ I love your healthcare crisis spin. Thanks for stopping in! Now I will have have to blogroll you.

  • Blogger FleshPresser posted at 3:15 PM  
    Thanks! I'd return the favor if I could only figure out how to blogroll.... :)

  • Anonymous Anonymous posted at 5:19 AM  
    I am reading too. I love your writing. Congrats on the new "sweet" wheels! A little more frightening to me than Bush displaying his hypocrisy (something that, sadly, I have come to expect) is the gross abuse of power by this Republican led government. They are not even trying to hide it anymore!

  • Blogger Nunzia Rider posted at 8:24 AM  
    Oddly enough, this case began when Michael Schiavo and the Schindlers disagreed over whether to continue life support. Michael, as Terri's guardian, used an option available in Florida that essentially hands the decision over to a court, which is charged with gathering all the facts and making a decision. The Schindlers didn't like that and haven't let go yet.

    But yes, it is an interesting take on "sanctity of marriage," isn't it? It plainly shows just why one can't use "moral" and "religious" codes for civil matters -- they conflict! They will always conflict, somewhere, someway, somehow, and you'll be stuck defending the indefensible, just like Dubya.

  • Blogger Michael posted at 1:30 AM  
    A very nice post. With your permission, I'd lile to link my blog to yours.

  • Blogger FleshPresser posted at 9:47 AM  
    Thanks, Michael... feel free to link away... where is your blog?

    • Post a Comment

    « Home