Skip to comments.
Bush Blew It By Not Vetoing Shaivo Act
March 23, 2005
| Robert Barnstone
Posted on 03/23/2005 10:51:18 AM PST by Westpole
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-62 next last
1
posted on
03/23/2005 10:51:18 AM PST
by
Westpole
To: Westpole
2
posted on
03/23/2005 10:52:51 AM PST
by
traderrob6
(http://www.exposingtheleft.blogspot.com)
To: Westpole
I agree, for the most part. I am afraid we will rue the day that some of us championed for the Fed. Gov. to get involved. This is a state issue. One that Florida needs to handle.
3
posted on
03/23/2005 10:52:53 AM PST
by
yellowdoghunter
(Children need two-parent homes, hopefully the ones who actually made them.)
To: Westpole
I am not sure what to think about this.
4
posted on
03/23/2005 10:53:10 AM PST
by
RockinRight
(Electing Hillary president would be akin to giving a drunken teenage boy keys to the Porsche)
To: Westpole
What the freek? Are you kidding me? What planet is this dude on?
5
posted on
03/23/2005 10:53:18 AM PST
by
FormerACLUmember
(Honoring Saint Jude's assistance every day.)
To: Westpole
6
posted on
03/23/2005 10:53:28 AM PST
by
Echo Talon
(http://echotalon.blogspot.com)
To: Westpole; Admin Moderator
Do you have a link for this?
7
posted on
03/23/2005 10:54:09 AM PST
by
eyespysomething
(It starts off as a drum circle, next thing you know you've got a college.)
To: Westpole; MeekOneGOP
HUH?
8
posted on
03/23/2005 10:54:16 AM PST
by
PilloryHillary
(Can vegetarians eat animal crackers?)
To: yellowdoghunter
I remember something in one of those federal documents 'LIFE, Liberty, and the Persuit of Happiness' How exactly is this not a federal issue?
To: Westpole
It is particularly egregious because heretofore family law issues were indisputably the province of State law. Until Roe v. Wade that is.
10
posted on
03/23/2005 10:54:55 AM PST
by
ksen
("He that knows nothing will believe anything." - Thomas Fuller)
To: zbigreddogz
Isn't that document banned from California schools?
11
posted on
03/23/2005 10:55:36 AM PST
by
ksen
("He that knows nothing will believe anything." - Thomas Fuller)
To: yellowdoghunter
I'd agree if the Florida courts didn't have a history of rulings in violation of clearly written laws.
12
posted on
03/23/2005 10:55:56 AM PST
by
wolfpat
(Dum vivimus, vivamus)
To: Westpole
First, I will type this very slowly so you can understand .. the act was to allow federal judaical review - not to save Teri necessarily.
13
posted on
03/23/2005 10:56:15 AM PST
by
roylene
To: zbigreddogz
It is really just my personal opinion. I am an advocate of State's rights and a smaller, lesser Fed. Gov.
14
posted on
03/23/2005 10:56:22 AM PST
by
yellowdoghunter
(Children need two-parent homes, hopefully the ones who actually made them.)
To: Westpole
So you assume the "moral high ground" by starving disabled women? A curious ethic this author has.
15
posted on
03/23/2005 10:56:22 AM PST
by
inkling
To: zbigreddogz
If anything related to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness was considered a federal issue, then everything could be a federal issue. (Not to mention that federal court jurisdiction comes from the Constitution, not the Declaration.)
16
posted on
03/23/2005 10:56:56 AM PST
by
VRWCisme
To: Westpole
Yep. This IS the Roe vs. Wade case for euthanasia.
If this killing stands, 5 years from now families will have a "private choice" to starve anyone who may be considered a burden or less than perfect in their family. It will be deemed politically correct, and anyone speaking out against it will be charged with a hate speech crime.
To: Westpole
I have no idea what you're talking about...
...so here's a picture of Helen Thomas before she sheds her antlers.
18
posted on
03/23/2005 10:58:10 AM PST
by
Redcloak
(There is no "I" in team. But then again, there is no "us" in it either. There is "meat" however.)
To: Westpole
19
posted on
03/23/2005 10:58:39 AM PST
by
aculeus
(Ceci n'est pas une tag line.)
To: yellowdoghunter
Yah, so am I. But I do believe the federal government exists for SOMETHING. Protecting our Constitutional right to life is one of the things it can and should do.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-62 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson