'Culture of Life' Issues Split GOP

[Timebound]

By Ronald Brownstein Times Staff Writer

WASHINGTON — Over a roller-coaster week, the Terri Schiavo case demonstrated both the political gains religious conservatives have achieved over the last generation and the challenges they still face in building a consensus for their agenda.

The aggressive intervention by President Bush (news - web sites) and congressional Republicans in the conflict underscored their commitment to social conservative causes, while the muted, hesitant response from most Democrats highlighted their uncertainty about handling values issues after the 2004 elections.

Yet as legal and political options for extending Schiavo's life dwindled, so did public support for Washington's involvement in the dispute, according to several national polls. In a CBS News survey, opposition was so widespread that even decisive majorities of Republicans, conservatives and white evangelical Christians said Bush and Congress should not have intervened.


More:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=2026&e=10&u=/latimests/cultureoflifeissuessplitgop

[Mithras61]

1. What commitment to social conservative values would that be?

Let's see... they've violated their "States Rights" platform, passed laws allowing life support to be removed from patrients who can't afford to pay for medical care, cut funding for Medicare, and used a poor brain-damaged patient in FL as a groteque example of what lengths they will go to achieve political gain.

I don't see any "social conservative" causes supported by any of that...

[w4rma]

2. This article is BS. Dems didn't get involved because Dems believe this

isn't a matter for Congress to handle. The Democratic Party is nearly unanimous on that.

And as for "commitment to conservative 'values'" by the Republican Party, this extravaganza is a sham and only affects (or, more specifically, doesn't affect) one person.

[Solar]

3. We also didnt get involved because

We also didnt get involved because the idiots were basically shooting themselves in the head. All we need to do is pull up a chair and watch.

[ixion]

4. a consensus for their agenda?

Lordy lord I hope we never reach that point. :hide:

[Dave Reynolds]

12. No kidding,

we'd have have a big steaming pile of theocracy to deal with.

[hippiechick]

5. WTF ?

..."while the muted, hesitant response from most Democrats highlighted their uncertainty about handling values issues after the 2004 elections... "

Uh, no ... what it highlights is their understanding that there are some places government intervention DOES NOT BELONG.

:mad:

[Old and In the Way]

6. "highlighted their uncertainty about handling values issues"

No, we were pretty certain this was high political hypcrisy on display. Most of us knew that this was an issue between the Schindler's and the Schiavo's and, ultimately, the courts had gotten their ruling correct.

What this article proves, is that the Corporate owned media can twist any event to put Democrats in a bad light.

[cornermouse]

7. Surely you knew that this is how it would be played by the media

and you have to realize that the democrats were taking the chance that this is also how the public by and large would interpret their passiveness.

[Al-CIAda]

8. BS is right. Even in an article supposidly addressing the 'splitting GOP"

They have to create a controversy w/the Dems. Bullshit.

They may need a letter-

How to Contact the Los Angeles Times

We like to hear from you. We have numerous ways for you to tell our editors and writers what you think about what's on the Web site or in the newspaper. You can also submit a Letter to the Editor for publication in The Times.
COMMENTS & QUESTIONS
If you have a question about Finding Articles, Content We Don't Have, Rights and Permissions, or Sending Us a Press Release, please review our Site Services area.
E-mailing Specific News Departments or Site Sections
To contact us with a suggestion, story tip or question, please use one of the following two menus:

http://www.latimes.com/services/site/la-contactus,0,1439615.htmlstory

[bpilgrim]

9. "their commitment to social conservative causes" -> SUN HUDSON

March 15, 2005, 8:16PM
Baby born with fatal defect dies after removal from life support (against POOR mothers wishes)
By LEIGH HOPPER
Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/3084934

peace

[ninkasi]

11. Please note, too...

That baby Sun's mother received no prenatal care, which might have diagnosed the condition much sooner. Of course, since funds have been so drastically slashed for people, it's likely that the lack of care was due to the mother's being poor.

Even if she had received the care, and the condition diagnosed, the so-called Values gang would have been against letting her abort the child IF that is what she wanted. I wish they would all get raptured, or whatever it is, and let the rest of us lead lives without all of their false piety being shoved down our throats.

In the Schaivo case, even if the husband and the parents agreed, if there was no money for health care, they would have taken that feeding tube much sooner, if they lived in Texas. Smirk signed this legislation into law when he was ruining Texas.

Edited to correct spelling

[Erika]

13. Bush said "If you can't pay, the plug will be pulled"

when he was governor of Texas. What compassion.

[VegasWolf]

10. Many traditional Republicans that I know are completely turned off by

the christian fanatic nutjobs that have taken over their party.