Unfortunately, abortion remains perfectly legal, so that isn’t at issue. As for family disputes involving removing someone from life support, the Shiavo case was different because her husband was her guardian and it was argued that he did not have her best interests at heart because he would benefit if she died. I guess her case is a good reason to consider a living will or document stating if you do want to be kept alive. IMO, the judge in her case made very bad rulings and eventually congress decided to get involved. They were not mandated to, they chose to and I believe they did the right thing under the circumstances.
So what made Terri more important that all the other people that have been the subject of end of life decisions which led to a family dispute.
Should Congress get involved in all such cases?
Why not grant Equal Protection to all people on life support so that Congress treats them as equally as they did Terri?
Dogz is playing with you because it disdains pro-lifers. There is a thin facade of ‘protect the alive unborn’ but in the end the protection is a situational transaction not related to unalienable rights, as the poster’s vacuous-soul posts indicate. This poster has a template of why Terri should be put down and ignores any of the points regarding parents that wanted to care for Terri, any points that support she was not brain dead albeit severely retarded via neglect carried out over years by the very guardian a sick dead-soul judge protected. And there is so much more, but be advised there are dead-soul liars at FR who enjoy the anguish they can generate by insulting the very memory of Terri Schiavo.
That's all I need to read from you. You are obviously clueless on the case - deluded by the death cult.