Posted on 03/20/2005 2:15:46 PM PST by Jean S
The more I think about this, the more I think that the best argument is simply that the remedy is unconstitutional. It's really a form of torture, which I thinkm, the federal government has a right to prohibit. The rest of it really is a states rights issue.
Sounds like what they said when they got rid of the abortion laws. For that matter, sounds like what the Germans said when they killed the first handicapped kid.
Let's put you in her place. Let's say you are conscious of your surroundings as Terri demonstrated ON CAMERA, and let's say she wanted to live, but could not get that message across to anyone. Now let's put YOU in her body. How would you feel having your means of life support removed from your body, but unable to tell anyone that you want to live? Have you even seen any of the video clips taken of Terri and how she responds to her environment?
You don't need to go to court to have an abortion. The Dems say that the feds have no role in this process. Fine. Let them bring an 8 year lawsuit every time they want to do this. If the feds have no role in this process, then the feds have no right to create any kind of streamlined process, which you can bet they'd do, if they had any say-so in this.
"we should do if for people to if that is they're choice."
So are you in favor of legalizing euthanasia?
(No one actually knows if Terri Schiavo wants to end her life. Only hearsay has been provided. There is no living will.)
You could see that with perfect 20-20 vision if you knew that the judge is involved with many of the helmlock hospices. Terri was illegally transferred to the current one 5 years ago. Read all about it here: Hospice FRAUD!
Having a relationship declared a legal, common law marriage is very complecated, has to be brought before a judge in a legally filed case for a ruling and only if the state the parties reside even has a common law marriage statute on the books.
Could you please direct me to proof that this has been done in this case?
Thank you.
It's not declared. My point is that for all intents and purposes, they would be considered common-law married in an instant.
It's funny (or not) that when Chris Reeve was alive the libs were screaming that stem cell research could help him against the admonitions of many medicos that this was not the case. But in this situation there's not a peep from them. Just cries of "she's dead" and "there is no hope for her".
Well I think for the Dem's this is a lose-lose situation.
I guess we'll just have to see how bad they want to lose.
Yea I bet the "Hubby" is feeling a little nervous tonight.
It is passing strange that if this were a horse that were being starved, this would be a slam-dunk charge of cruelty to animals, no matter what judge had passed on it. If this were Ted Bundy or John Wayne Gacy being starved, then this would be cruel and unusual punishment under the 8th amendment. Even Bobby Sands probably received more consideration from the British than Judge Greer is giving Mrs. Schiavo.
But to some people in our government, starving a human is merely "a heart-wrenching private matter." I don't agree. I don't believe that any government in these United States can legitimately order a cruel execution via starvation for either man or beast.
If one volunteers to not receive sustenance clearly via living will, then that is one thing -- and it is not the thing now under discussion. A court simply ordering this inhuman cruelty with no crystal clear request for such expressed on the part of the person is wrong in my opinion.
Considering the Lib's take on all this I bet when the TV movie come out it'll be called "The Michael Shiavo Story".
It is a lose-lose situation for the Dems. You are correct.
Sometimes you just have to do what's right and make the law conform. I have no problem with that.
They never bring that up - not once on MSM have I heard that Michael has been living with another woman as her husband and has two children with her. Why don't they mention that? Surely the MSM is aware of that fact, aren't they?
"If that's their choice" - that's the key.
**MS has been common-law married to another women for the past 10 years.** (MS being Michael Schiavo)
And that may be the whole problem. He can't marry his girl
friend until Terry dies.
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.