One more thing about the Terri Schiavo case

The rabbi who will be officiating our marriage ceremony wrote this letter for the Boston Globe. He made the good point that the queer community has really missed an opportunity in not coming out strong against the hypocrisy of the people defending Terri Schiavo’s parents’ “right” to continually maul the justice system.

To the Editor,

It is remarkable how selective the
“defense” of the “sanctity of marriage” is on the part of those
political and religious conservatives who are

challenging Michael Schiavo’s rights in the medical decisions involving
his wife. Obviously, their passionate arguments for the
“inviolate” priority of traditional marriage only extend to their
opposition to the civil rights of same sex couples. Their protests
against her husband’s efforts to end Terri Schiavo’s suffering may
reflect a “seamless pro-life” position – but dramatically expose the
inconsistency and hypocrisy of their views on marriage.

Rabbi Howard A. Berman (Co-Founder, Religious Coalition for the Freedom to Marry)


~ by realsupergirl on March 25, 2005.

5 Responses to “One more thing about the Terri Schiavo case”

  1. I think I may be missing something. “Seamless pro-life position”?? Maybe, if we deny that the doctors murdered by anti-abortion enthusiasts had a life. (note: terri’s parents’ lawyer, MucCullough, is the kind of “pro-life” guy that raids abortion clinics and defends those that kill doctors that perform abortions.) Or that any of those executed, many of them in Tejas, home of the brave pro-lifer extraorinaire GWB, many of whom were mentally retarded – had a life. a$$holes.
    sd in tx

  2. I think that is why he put it in quotes. My reading was that he was referring to the argument made by many of the people arguing Schiavo should be artificially kept alive, not that he was supporting this argument.

    But you make good points about other instances of hypocrisy in the religious right’s beliefs. There’s so much hypocrisy, it’s hard to know where to begin.

  3. Agreed, that is one of the points behind the gay marriage issue. They want to be able to make those decisions for their spouse if they end up in a situation like this. Or at least get better visiting hours.
    So if that is the power vested in a spouse, and your parents are no longer your legal guardians after you turn 18, how was this ever an issue?

    chat back to

  4. I’m just curious – Who is this? How did you find my blog?

  5. I am me, and someone had referenced your site on their blog, I just followed the link.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: