On #3 I say that he is "married" to someone else. He is indeed in a common law marriage. Take that for what it is worth.
I firmly believe Michael Schiavo's real motivation here is to avoid being charged with abuse he committed while Terri was still healthy...and possibly with causing the health crisis that left her disabled. It's the only thing that explains why he won't relinquish her care to someone else, even when offered money. Her body contains evidence against him, so it must be destroyed.
Her unfaithful husband is unavoidably and hopelessly conflicted between her true interests and his own, and the state judge is clearly biased and unwilling to listen to or hear of those allegations...therefore, it provides the opportunity for a different venue...in this case a federal court.
Our most basic unalienable right is the right, endowed by the creator on all mankind, to life. That is codefied into our law. If the state process is flawed and not providing for it, then a federal court should hear it. Some may well considere this to be "Federal intervention". I say, that since it is being done to protect her unalienable right to life from corruption and conflict of interest IMHO, then this is reason for intervetnion if there ever was one.
Please post some sources. I agree entirely with you, but I have some liberal colleagues who demand references everytime I say something like "Her husband is estranged" or "Doctors have said that she is responsive". Of course, they believe everything they read in the NY Times!
I've said all along that we the public do not have the facts on this case. The few that you list support my theory that this is more about money than anything else.
Anyone, except of cours the ACLU, who believes that the husband cares about his wife or that she told him that she did not wish to be on any life support measures is naive.
This guy stands to make millions of dollars over this. The fact that she could come home should be enough to convince anyone that if her family wishes to care for her then they should.
I'm surprised that the parties could not compromise on this. The only explanation is that the husband's desire to cash in on his wife's story is the real truth.
Regarding Congress getting involved or not, I must admit that I don't think Congress should supercede the states in matters such as this...but on the other hand this passed unanimously in the senate and had overwelming support in the house and the the president's support.
In other words, in this personal incident, they are doing the right thing.
I've been doing alot of research on the details of the Schiavo case (unlike Rush and Hannity who were clueless when I tuned them in this afternoon.
It's disengenuous to imply that Terri is suffering like a healthy person would suffer without food. The hyperbole in this case has obscured the fact that feeding tubes are removed on a regular basis in this country--without fanfare because the family is in agreement.
By the way, I'm not defending Michael Schiavo.
bttt