Posted on 12/07/2005 5:02:27 PM PST by eartotheground
Mikey would be better off staying out of sight, but I suspect he and OJ share a need to get back in public, get back moving around. It's not enough to simply get away with murder.
. . . the two have not yet discussed whether Schiavo will collect a salary from the PAC for his efforts.
There is no doubt he will. It just doesn't fit his victim image to admit it right now.
Sound of the Trumpets, the horses neighing. The smell of the leather, and of the blood, the clashing of steel and the screaming of men.
The battle is joined. Tis good to be back. Just like old times, it is. Just like old times.
Why would anyone agree with someone being forced to starve against their will? I thought Schiavo's routine was always to insinuate that it WAS her will. Are they shifting the goalposts or do they want to go on the record in support of forcing people to starve to death?
Good catch!
We shouldn't start down that road. Because if we do then that brings up the little matter of what that makes the children. Now, I agree they are blameless, but the fact remains that if they are born of parents that are not married, they are something that starts with a B and ends with a D.
OTOH, if he's a bigamist, you can't legally be married twice so they are B-Ds either way, but nobody cares about such things anymore, right? We're far too "toooolerant" for that. Riiight?
Michael used her up.
Right. He was in the wrong state. In Texas he'd be common law married, but Fl doesn't have it. In fact, that's how he was able to get away with the murder in plain sight, or at least part of the scheme, because they couldn't force a divorce through because he wasn't bigamizing the other B.
To hell with that wife murdering scum!!!
Gee, ya think?
As it turned out, though, they lost rather than gained politically. Karma's a bitch.
How about the 14th ammendment:
U.S. Constitution - Amendment 14 - Citizenship rights 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Sadly, this nation is mired in a culture of death. Actually, it is a hard left ideology.
One need not be nosy, busybody, right-to-life ... or even a fanatic ... to question whether or not Terri Schiavo had ever verbally expressed any opinions about having her own life terminated. Certainly, it is clear and incontrovertible that she did not put those desires into written form where they would have proven to us what she really wanted.
Many decent people have questioned whether or not Michael Schiavo merely said that Terri expressed a desire for her own death because it would be a convenience for him.
Terri Schiavo is now dead. Michael Schiavo has not covered himself with glory at any stage of this ordeal ... and, obviously wants to profit from Terri's tragic story.
Terri Schiavo is a bit of a martyr ...Michael Schiavo comes across as more of an opportunist. Some of his actions toward Terri's family can only be described as contemptible.
Perhaps it is time for everyone ... including Michael Schiavo ... to allow poor Terri Schiavo to rest in peace.
Decent people can agree to disagree on this one. God alone will sort this one out in the end.
Many states once had laws prohibiting bastards [the actual, proper legal term] from having rights of inheritance. This would have been as recently as, perhaps, the 1960s.
Does anyone know if any states still have laws like that on the books? Not likely in today's "enlightened" world.
Oh, yes, they probably have ... they have just not found it convenient to announce that he will.
The judge had "clear and convincing" evidence as to her wishes. You have a problem with our legal system? You'd be happier with a poll?
Who will resolve your question? Someone must make a decision. Who?
"whether or not Michael Schiavo merely said that Terri expressed a desire for her own death"
And he convinced two others to lie under oath with him and risk being charged with perjury. Why would they do that? Would you?
Yes, I do have a problem with our legal system. It has been overrun with "activist judges", who are hard left ideologues, and believe that "the end justifies the means". I certainly am not painting all judges with that brush ... it appears to be a generational thing, and the ones I deplore tend to be younger ones who came out of law schools after, say, about 1975 [after the hard left had infiltrated the law schools and were teaching bad [hard left] ideology in them.And he convinced two others to lie under oath with him and risk being charged with perjury. Why would they do that?How closely have you observed the legal system over the past forty years? If you had, and if you were objective, you would understand what I am saying.
Regrettably, many of today's judges are not capable of being objective. Tragically, "clear and convincing" to many judges today means ... as it does for people like Michael Schiavo ... and, perhaps, you as well ... what they want to believe to produce the outcome they desire.
Judicial Activism is a reality of our time. It is "outcome based" ... just as surely as Outcome Based Education is ... and, it starts with a desired concept and proceeds toward that end.
Moral relativsm has been taught in the public schools for decades and often, with a large dose of secular humanism is taught in lieu of religion in the churches of today, as well.Would you?Tragically, there are a couple of generations of people who have no clearcut concept of good/bad, evil/divine, right/wrong ... all of their values are relative and mutable ... unless they have learned their values elsewhere ... usually at home.
False witnesses are procured all the time. Some have been convinced by someone to say something false while believing it to be true ... or, sometimes, they simply want to do a friend a favor ... or, for some unknown reason, someone testified under oath to a Congressonal committee the other day that she saw someone blow up the levee in N.O.... and, sometimes, testimoney is simply bought and paid for. It happens all the time.
Perjury charges are seldom brought. There is not much risk there.
No, I would not. Regardless of the outcome, or detriment I might incur, I would not lie under oath.
WDL, I meant to include you in Post No.115.
And your alternative is ... what?
And your alternative is ... what?
My "alternative" [your pathetic choice of word] is what every true conservative aspires to accomplish:
to remove judicial activists from the judiciary and judicial activism from the legal system ... thus, to restore sanity, honesty and integrity to a once adequate system.
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.