Thats right and this forum was up in arms on how wrong it was. Is this 2 wrongs make a right?
Elian's mother wished for him to have freedom, and it was denied by the government. For the libs to have consistency on this, Schiavo's husband must also have his wish denied by the government.
Are you contending it would be wrong for the Cheif Executive to save the life of this citizen?
There are a lot of parallels with Elian Gonzales here.
Elian Gonzales' father's rights trumped Elian's right to liberty and Micheal Schiavo's rights as a husband trumps his wife's right to life. Or so the left says. IOWs men may treat their women and children as property. The Dems are doing really well on civil rights issues these days. They are moving wayyyyy back to try to recapture traditional values as their issue. Maybe Robert Byrd will be able to put his sheets back on soon.
In terms of inalienable rights I consider the right to life to be the most basic, the most fundamental, without life you can't very well exercise any other right. Yet the argument seems to be that spousal rights trump it. Spousal rights are being trumpeted as an absolute that even the other spouse's right to life must bow to. Sounds like wife as chattel to me.