Latest Diablo 3 News
DiabloWiki Updates
Support the site! Become a Diablo: IncGamers PAL - Remove ads and more!

Terry Schiavo/Steroids in MLB--Should Bush or Congress Care? der=0

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by Krushedice, Mar 23, 2005.

  1. Krushedice

    Krushedice IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2004
    Messages:
    467
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    143
    Terry Schiavo/Steroids in MLB--Should Bush or Congress Care?

    I see and have read a thread relating to Terry Schiavo and want to ask a question that, as an American, pertains more to me than whether or not this woman should be allowed to die of dehydration.

    Dennis Miller, Bill Maher, Lou Dobbs, and countless other public figures who I can't remember to name have asked this question in one form or another:

    The US is at War
    The US is in an oil/energy crisis
    The US is still battling with North Korea over Nukes
    The US is about to engage in an anatomy measuring contest with China over Taiwan and its independence
    The US is getting ready to screw American workers again with CAFTA

    Congress is worried about whether or not Terry Schiavo, an individual who has been given YEARS of due process by the court system empowered by the laws they create, lives or dies.

    Congress is worried about whether Mark McGuire is using steroids while setting his records.

    Is either of these issues going to ensure that when I'm old enough that I can live off of my social security? Is ANY of this crap going to keep my business from being shut down because some other country provides the service I do for $1 per day? Is ANY OF THIS GRANDSTANDING GOING TO KEEP OUR BORDERS OR OUR SCHOOLS SAFE?

    What the heck is going on? Does anybody believe that this is the most effective use of time for our lawmakers? They are meeting on Palm Sunday to pass a law for the benefit of one person, when back when the 9-11 commission released the reports and recommendations to Congress they admitted that they wouldn't have the bandwidth until they reconvened the following year. What gives?
     
  2. Matt

    Matt IncGamers Site Pal

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Messages:
    4,163
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    467
    Its a publicity stunt to make those who set it up (aka Tom Delay and friends) look like the good guys who care about everyone, when in reality this "caring for individuals" act leaves the real responsibility of doing what they're SUPPOUSED to do (the things you listed for example) to the wolves.
     
  3. Eiger

    Eiger IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2003
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    This is really pretty funny. It's happening because the Christian right decided to flex their muscle and the republicans are looking to make their base happy.

    However, in doing so they're really moving away from their "conservative" philosophy of smaller less invasive government as outlined in 1994's contract with America.

    Dave Reichert, a republican who represents the district south of mine was one of 5 repulicans in the house to vote against it - and the reason he gave was that it's none of Congress' business. He says this is an issue between the family and their doctors and should be decided according to local laws. I agree with him.
     
  4. Matt

    Matt IncGamers Site Pal

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Messages:
    4,163
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    467
    I do for the most part as well. If the case gets appealed to the federal court level, well, so be it. However, whether or not its a "local issue" really has nothing to do with Congress, either way, I agree with him that Congress should stay out, the issue doesnt concern them, its not their job to deal with it.

    So yeah, I agree with him in principle, though I'm not sure I nessicarily (sp) agree that its an exclusively local issue. It IS however, a legal/medical issue, to be dealt with by lawyers and doctors, respectively.

    -Matt
     
  5. Ranger14

    Ranger14 IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Messages:
    1,397
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    105
    Taking two different issues is not going to be keeping this thread on track too well, but how do we decide what issues and laws are more important than others? The government has a lot of issues to deal with and the list is a lot longer than what was posted. I guess they can turn a blind eye to certain issues, but I fail to see what that accomplishes.

    I personally feel the steroid issue has a huge impact of the future of the youth in our country. Studies show that over 1 million teenagers are using illegal steroids and it has trickled down into the 5th and 6th grade as to reported users. Kids are dying from steroids. Yes, kids are dying from alcohol and other drugs and car accidents, but it doesn't mean we should ignore the issue.

    MLB players are illegally using these substances and they are not being penalized, they are actually given 5 chances per the current MLB policy. Meanwhile, the guy next door is getting thrown into jail for a Class 3 drug offense. As long as our constitution says that we are all to be treated equal, I believe that this is a government issue.
     
  6. Eiger

    Eiger IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2003
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    By "local issue" I mean according to state law. That's also the direction that a very conservative US Supreme Court has given in this case.
     
  7. Usufruct

    Usufruct IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2003
    Messages:
    2,858
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    165
    I read a hilarious quote on another forum.

    "Terry Schiavo wouldn't even be an issue if the democrats weren't so anti-life"

    Yes... we liberals are anti-life. Please join me in petetioning congress so we can do something about this whole life epidemic. It's really getting out of hand.
     
  8. Krushedice

    Krushedice IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2004
    Messages:
    467
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    143
    But this is not about turning a blind eye to certain areas of law while focusing on others. This is about delegating control to a group of people sworn to uphold the rules you set and then telling them to apply this specific rule to this specific case. Congress was designed to make laws on a broad scope to protect the interests of the masses, which is why they are not weighing in on me getting a speeding ticket or passing laws the apply to my circumstances only. It is not right for them to step in where they feel that the law is being upheld, but they don't like the end result.

    And as far as the impact of Steriods on this country's youth: Education, Marajauna/Illegal drugs, School Safety has just as profound of an effect on our youth as their favorite baseball player juicing up. Congress may not be able to legitimately clean up baseball, but they can damned sure pass legislation that will provide more money to better our education systems, or improve drug traffic prevention. When's the last time you've heard about legislation dealing with education getting through congress without becoming about every thing else in the world? If they can get that right for a change then perhaps these microchasms wouldn't be so viable in the public eye in the first place.


    I read a hilarious quote on another forum.

    "Terry Schiavo wouldn't even be an issue if the democrats weren't so anti-life"

    That's the funniest thing I've heard in a very long time :lol:
     
  9. Matt

    Matt IncGamers Site Pal

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Messages:
    4,163
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    467
    I agree that congress should play a role in dealing with the issue of steroids. However, when that is turned into the publicity stunt it is, by attacking you know, 8 ballplayers or something, thats ridiculous, its gone from preventing steroid use, to punishing 8 guys for it. Congress SHOULD play a role in preventing steroids, that role should NOT be individual cases, it should be passing laws to prevent and punish for the use of steroids, on a general level, not any specific case.

    -Matt
     
  10. DrunkCajun

    DrunkCajun Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2004
    Messages:
    5,249
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I think it's actually a political stunt tailored to gain points for the anti-euthanasia crowd and, frankly, the pro-lifers. The steroid nonsense is an issue politicians know will keep the public's attention, and after all, why should the President waste his breath tiptoeing around the tulips with regards to Iraq when he could just talk about baseball in his State of the Union and burn some time/attention spans that way.

    Frankly, what I find even more interesting than the things Krushed mentioned, is one that didn't make the list--school shooting anyone?

    If Congress should be setting up highly motivated committees and subpeonaing anyone, it should be experts in the fields relevant to troubled youth and how they get guns in their hands.
     
  11. DrizzitT

    DrizzitT IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    11
    Steroid Case is a govt case
    Schiavo is not

    Schiavo is getting most press attention
    Steroid Case moderate
    and truly important ones, none.

    Sad, but true. Then again, if you dont pay attention to TV/just front page news, you know about the other problems.

    And i agree its pretty damn pathetic that the ^ two are getting so much Congress time. While its sad, its life. but what im REALLY pissed at is they called up an EMERGENCY CONGRESS session to deal with Schiavo... o_O.

    And those mofos couldnt call up an Emergency Congress Session to deal with any of the tpics that are pertinent to the immediate decline of the United States. Such as Oil Crisis, Korea, etc... Of all things to call a emergency congress session for... *sigh*
     
  12. kernelpops

    kernelpops IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2003
    Messages:
    827
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    120

    As what was stated in the other thread, what can congress do to stop school shootings? The student was unexpected (not the first choice to be a maniac), he stole guns from his grandfather, who was a police officer, and did a bad thing. Congress can debate this all they want, but short of the giant magnet theory, (a giant magnet from the sky to suck up all guns on the planet) Congress can't do anything to stop kids from doing stupid things.

    Gun control will not solve it, throwing more money at schools will not solve it, only in a police state can that issue be solved, and even then there will be events.

    Paying for enough personal counseliers will be huge, and another government program bond to suck funds and make no difference.

    What I am trying to say is that the social structure of the nation needs to change where parents raise their kids, or in this instances someone raises the kid to know right and wrong. Congress can't do that for us.

    I also agree that they should have stayed out of the Schaivo case, as that was a local area with laws already established.
     
  13. DrunkCajun

    DrunkCajun Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2004
    Messages:
    5,249
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Oh, absolutely kernel, don't get me wrong. I don't think there's ****-all we can do about school shootings. But Congress is supposed to be the knee-jerk body of the government, and if there is anything going on that should draw a knee-jerk reaction, its school shootings.

    Just goes to show that the anti-abortion/anti-euthanasia crusade means more to people than the possibility that their children can get shot to pieces in the "safety" of their own classrooms.
     
  14. kernelpops

    kernelpops IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2003
    Messages:
    827
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    120
    I agree with that DC.

    With regards to why is Congress wasting time and money on such small issues, that is politics. If you want to get re-elected trump the cause that will effect the most voters to feel good about what you, as a congress person do and will get the most votes from the unwashed people and avoid the hard topics that may make enemies in the re-election times.
     
  15. piff

    piff IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Messages:
    2,352
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    466
    Congress should be involved in Terri's case. The government's job is to rule on what its public may and may not do. This is regarding a member of the public's (Terri's husband's) choice to end a vegetable's life. The government can either rule to allow him to do so or to not allow him to do so. The government is solving a problem regarding members of the public, the problem of ending the life of someone who cannot be human, but is not in a coma.

    Congess should stay out of MLB's steriod problems, given that steriods are legal acording to federal laws. MLB is a private business. Its goal is to make money, the number 1 idea of capitalism. The only way the government should be permitted to interfere is with interstate commerce, which this is not. This is a matter of the rules of a private business, which only the judical branch can interfere with if everything is legal.

    My views on each specific topic:
    Pull the feeding tube on Terri. She's been vegetative for 15 years, and the husband waited eight to try to save her, and that failed. Her hospital bed could go to someone else who needs it. Also, I'm tired of hearing about her.
    My views abotu the steriods are stated above.
     
  16. DrunkCajun

    DrunkCajun Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2004
    Messages:
    5,249
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Where were they when that little black baby in Texas was taken off life support and allowed to die?
     
  17. piff

    piff IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Messages:
    2,352
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    466
    Beats me, but they don't have to rule on everything. Anything that is not stated or implied by any law is permitted. At the time, they did not intervene, whether they should have or not.
     
  18. DrunkCajun

    DrunkCajun Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2004
    Messages:
    5,249
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    And by the way--as her husband, what's his face is her legal guardian in this case. Legal implies law.
     
  19. piff

    piff IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Messages:
    2,352
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    466
    Yes, but that refers to his status compared to her. I'm not sure on the specifics, but if, as legal guardian, there is nothing about "pulling the plug," then the legal guardian may do as he wishes, given that it also doesn't violate any other laws.
     
  20. Ranger14

    Ranger14 IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Messages:
    1,397
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    105
    Umm, Piff, steroids ARE illegal according to federal law! That is why I have such a strong issue with baseball not enforcing the federal laws with their players. Because of it, they may lose their exception with the anti-trust laws and collective bargaining as they are the only sport that was granted that by the government. That makes them different than other private businesses. If they don't change their policies to enforce the law and punish the steroid users, the government will change the anti-trust laws when it comes to baseball.

    As per Matt's comments, I watched the whole hearing and did not see it as grandstanding at all. The hearing was professional, the players were treated with respect and I felt the concerns were all valid.
     

Share This Page