| By RachelGoodman - Mar 21st, 2005 at 12:10 pm EST |
| Also listed in: Campus Progress Blog |
As far as I am concerned, the fact that the Democrats were unable to vote as a party against the federal legislation removing jurisdiction of this case to the federal courts demonstrates the complete capitulation of the party as the so-called "opposition". This vote continues the right's rejection of science, logic and reason, and the ascension of mob rule in the name of "morality" and "religion". The Democrats are now so afraid of this issue that they are completely unable to vote to restrain the exercise of federal power as long as the Republicans can frame that exercise as promoting the "culture of life".
The progressive position on this issue is a deeply centrist one - it rests on commitment to the rule of constitutional law. When George Will and CAP agree, you know the position being advanced is hardly radical. And yet the rhetorical center seems to have shifted so far right, due to pressure from conservative Christian movements, that moderates in Congress were afraid to stand for the Constitution.

Comments are closed for this post.
vegatitive state, and almost no one would
choose to starve to death. Perhaps we should
discuss
assisted suicide for Terri Schiavo. This is
illegal in Florida, and there are too many legal
restraints on moving Terry to Oregon, but why not
at least discuss this as the most humane option?
Nowhere
does euthanasia even enter the debate. If Terri
Schiavo's parents did not object, then it
would be perfectly legal to allow her to die from
starvation. Yet, it would be more humane still to
give her a drug cocktail and let her pass away
without starving for weeks. I think the mental
image of starvation is what most people object to
in the Terri Schiavo case, and we should address
how to allow her passing in the most ehtical and
humane manner.