Posted on 03/31/2005 6:53:45 AM PST by watchdog_writer
That's right. Throw down the gauntlet against judicial activism. A life was at stake, our nation's soul was at stake. Jeb could have gone in and saved Terri and the President could have pardoned him if need be. He's got that legal power left doesn't he?
I see FlipWilson was far more eloquent that I was. His post #32 is worth the read.
You're so right.
We are a nation of laws until we don't like one!
No, I dont favor a "living constitution," and the constitution cannot be amended by a Natural Law decision, (ie, if for example, a judge needed to stop a legislature from implementing death camps when he had no positive/written law venue to do so, there still would be no way for him to amend the text of the constitution/law, he could only declare such part of law void). Only in rare cases when a human life (an obvious natural right)is in danger and the positive law provides no protection for a human being, is the lawgiver obligated to stand up for the higher law. But we werent at that point yet, Bush still had Positive law venues to protect Terri, as the Thomas Moore Law Center, the 11th hour coalition, Klayman and Keyes all pointed out.
The alternative to natural law would be to bow down and worship whatever court decision or act of legislature is produced, be it Roe vs. Wade or Auschwitz. Remember Hans Kelsen, the foremost legal positivist in the 20th Century, said the Nazi death camps were "legal" and moral. He said we cant know what justice is (the relativist left always says we can know nothing, who knows what is right and wrong, so whatever "law" is validly innacted by the proper authorities is what we MUST live with).
I agree with you that the modernist "right of man" theory, detached from Christ, has been the source of a lot of abstract "rights" that the left uses the courts to push on us. But that is a bastardization, not the natural law real-deal that comes from St. Thomas and the Scholastics, and many of the Founding Fathers. But in these rare cases when a life is at stake, there has to be a better answer than "I was just following orders".
How about blaming the voters?
Last year, Greer drew his first opponent in any race for re-election. Protesters in the Schiavo case rallied around Jan Govan. But Greer easily defeated Govan.
How about blaming the liberals?
How The Florida Legislature and Governor Have Usurped the Judicial Role
in the Schiavo "Right to Die" Case
By MICHAEL C. DORF
But if there is no clear right answer in Terri Schiavo's case, there is nonetheless a clear wrong answer: When the Florida legislature and Governor Jeb Bush last week assumed responsibility for this most intimate of decisions, they violated several fundamental constitutional principles.
When presented with the Schindlers' videotape, the Florida legislature took an extraordinary step: It granted Florida Governor Jeb Bush the power to order the reinsertion of Terri Schiavo's feeding tube. Bush promptly exercised that power, the feeding tube was reinserted, and the lawyers headed back to court. The votes didn't come from liberals to help Terri they came from Republicans.
The President signed the legislation and is willing to take the heat from you and your kind.
Sorry but I have no idea what you call "vanity? maybe you would like to explain?
So the judges have no culpability? Next time you vote for a politician, why not ask what kind of judges he intend to support?
Next time you vote for a Judge ask if he will oppose abortion, oppose gay marriage?
begin disbanding, and re-organizing the judiciary. Rather than trying to impeach a judge, just eliminate his court, or a complete court system.
You don't agree with me in spiri. I do not share your views at all. I respect the rule of law, you are way too radical and will never get anything accomplished, with the exception of hearing your own voice.
So are most of the 11th Circuit Judges who refused to take up the case, thumbing their nose at Congress --- including the ass (Judge Birch) who delivered an arrogant sermon criticizing Congress and the president.
If you read Scalia: the point at which life becomes "worthless," and the point at which the means necessary to preserve it become "extraordinary" or "inappropriate," are neither set forth in the Constitution nor known to the nine Justices of this Court any better than they are known to nine people picked at random from the Kansas City telephone directory you might begin to have a better knowledge of why the Federal Courts refused to overturn the decisions of the state courts.
Jeb Bush as governor let Greer mount a mini-insurrection and get away with it.
Judge Greer may have abused his discretion, but his order was valid and constitutional protected. Don't be persuated by the rhetoric of those who want to blame republicans first.
Greer commandeered local cops and ordered them to repel a state agency and Jeb's state police.
I must respectfully disagree. Judges issue orders they don't control a police force. if the police acted it was because the order of a judge of competent jurisdiction must be obeyed otherwise we have anarchy.
No consequences for Greer in this act of rebellion.
It's not a rebellion. He exercised his constitutional authority. I may not agree but I will defend his right to do so. Perhaps next time it will be a truly conservative judge who will save the life of someone from the attempts of liberal athiests who want to arrest some child in elementary school for carrying a bible.
In fact, Jeb had respectful words for the slimy judge in a newspaper interview last week.
Because Jeb Bush is an honorable man and respects the rule of law. I am quite sure it took a great deal of restrain for him not to create chaos out of a simple case of a judge abusing his discretion.
You can say that only "liberals" made this happen, but the facts say different.
What facts? Liberals usually only offer platitudes but rarely can they give you anything specific.
you can also say Jeb bears no responsibility, but an act of ommission - by a person in authority - is an act all the same.
For an act of omission to be culpable, there must have been a duty to act. Not only was there no duty to act, but there was a duty not to act. Please enlighten me on exactly what legal authority, not biblcal, we do not have a theocracy, I have already heard from Aristotle, so please see if you can give me authority from the Florida Constitution or any Florida law or case.
Ability? is that the same as a clear legal authority?
but his political career was more important.
Even Dick Morris believes that Jeb Bush will suffer politically.
He stood by and watched while Terri was DEHYDRATED and STARVED to death.
Thank you for putting words in CAPS, otherwise I might not get your meaning.
What a coward.
The Bolshivics were not cowards. Hitler was not a coward. Stalin was not a coward. So I guess Jeb has distinguished himself from them.
He will NEVER be president.
You would rather see Hillary as president?
Will JUDGE GREER EVER be brought to Jusctice????? I think NOT!!!!!!
Judges abuse their discretion everyday of the week. The answer is vote him out of office. As strongly as you feel, I'm sure you will be the first in line holding a sign to remind voters that it was not Judge Greer who you blamed for Terri's death. .
However, even if he did not, JEB BUSH had the ability. His refusal to rescue Terri thereby permitting her BRUTAL STARVATION and DEHYDRATION will do FAR MORE DAMAGE to his country than if he had gone in and rescued her.
BTW, I see the BIG picture VERY CLEARLY. It is people like you who do not.
Of course they do. They have nearly all of the culpability. They are like a wayward child, unable to correct the error of their ways. It's up to our elected representatives to set them in their place, or to fire them, or to eliminate their jobs.
You don't agree with me in spiri.
Evidently not. I did say that I agreed in spirit with engrpat, not you
I do not share your views at all. I respect the rule of law
I respect the rule of law too, including the Constitution as the Founding Fathers wrote it. Including Article 3. I wish the judges did.
you are way too radical and will never get anything accomplished,
I probably won't I'm not as active as many others. Mark Levin (author of Men in Black) and Rush Limbaugh probably will though, and it is from those powerful men I first heard this radical idea. I hope you will consider their words and thoughts before you reject this Constitutional idea completely. The Founding Fathers came up with it over 200 years ago.
on the with the exception of hearing your own voice.
I'm not sure what to do with that, I post here (or any where else) so seldom I often feel like I'm not contributing my share.
I just checked your posting level..............seesh, I look like a real piker compared to you, and you have the nerve to say I'm talking too much?
If only life were as simple as you would like.
Judges are appointed for life. You can't fire them. If they are elected they would have to go through an impeachment procedure.
I read Men In Black. I don't remember Mr. Levin advocating the overthrow of the judiciary by force?
“I don't remember Mr. Levin advocating the overthrow of the judiciary by force?”
He didn’t, and I doubt he ever would. Nor did I say that, or anything approaching that.
When my posts are edited to turn what I said into a lie, or to say something I never said, it tells everyone reading it something important about your posts and the intellect contained therein.
It tells us that even you realize your posts are full of bull$hit. It tells us that you can't win, or even discuss, the argument on its merits, only by lying about your opponent.
Go away, stop telling lies about me, go tell lies about someone else if you must.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.