You are in control, Terri's mistake was not to have one!
You've forgotten the first judicial rule, written by the Red Queen in Alice in Wonderland. "A word shall mean exactly what I say it shall mean, nothing more". Just because you wrote it down in plain English doesn't mean that a judge can't interpret in the way he wants. They're so much smarter and superior to us, you know.
They denied due process of "Existing Law" already. The courts are not just judges anymore, they are the law makers and definers. They have supreme power over the Legislative and Executive Branches of Federal, State, County and City Gov't by fiat. What is true today does not, by any means, that they will not change in the future. How many laws have already been overturned by the "Almighty Judges" just this century? Unless the Executive and Legislative Branches of Gov't reign in this usurping of lawmaking which was delegated SOLEY to the Legislative Branch of Gov't, ALL of whom are elected BY THE PEOPLE, then this nation will be ruled by tyrannical judges. And depending upon which president is in office, will decide which kind of judiciary will rule the land. President Bush doesn't seem to care very much about his judicial appointments except to put them forward. He should use his powers as POTUS to stop a minority of senators from blocking his judicial nominees. If the Senate can usurp their laws, then president Bush should place his nominees into office by force if necessary, side stepping the U.S. Senate altogether. If the Senate can break Constitutional Law to get what they want, then President Bush should do the same UNTIL the Senate abides by the Constitution which states that the ENTIRE Senate shall vote up or down on ALL of his judicial appointments.
Yes! You can sign a living will and be starved to death on your own say so! Line forms to the left.
That's right, let's all blame Terri. It's become the trend these last couple of days -- she was bulimic, you know, it's all her fault she's where she is. She didn't have a living will, you know, it's all her fault she's being starved to death.
But, judge, I was told by her, just before she lost consciousness, that she defenitely didn't want to live like this, and that what she wrote in her living will didn't include this kind of circumstance, so please, judge, do as my wife asks, and order that her feeding tube be removed. NEWSFLASH: Judge Euthanasia Hemlock has ordered that the feeding tube be removed from Ms Life, as her last verbal will to her husband now usurps her former written living will. I have spoken, and so it will be.
Yeah, right, and when they read your living will the courts will exercise the same sort of 'latitude' by which a federal judge giving a statutory mandate to hear Terri's case de novo used in 'interpreting' the statute as requiring him to do nothing.
Actually, the courts are assuming that Terri's
expressed a verbal-will to her husband!
The only thing a Written "Living Will" would do is
detail her wishes on some (but never possibly all)
circumstances.
The courts are acting as if Terri HAD a "Living Will"
which is really just a document to tell the LIVING
what to do with your DYING Body.
The lesson of Terri is:
An arbitrary court will not be effectively restrained by the directly elected branches.
That fact puts government in default on its obligation to implement our Constitution.
We are on dangerous ground when one has to have a legal document to protect one's right to life in the face of government. Our right to life comes from God. Any state that presumes to take it away has just lost all moral authority.
"A living will will deny the courts a decision on your fate!
You are in control, Terri's mistake was not to have one"
If a judge decides you have one, you have one. The knife cuts both ways, if he decides you don't, you don't. When judges are legislating from the bench, anything goes
For the moment, perhaps. But I have no doubt that soon, very soon, precedents will be set that will allow whatever wishes you may have expressed to be ignored. The slippery slope is, almost universally, inevitable.
"The guardian has no discretion," said Felos. "It is not the guardian's decision to do this. It must be done because it is the order of this court."
http://www.baynews9.com/content/36/2005/3/17/74856.html
then
Google for 10 dirty guardianship tricks
That's not true, and people need to understand the laws of the state they are living in. Don't just assume that if you write a living will it will be followed. Some states allow a judge to over rule that in certain circumstances.
If the courts ignore a subpoena, ignore a law passed by Congress and signed by the President himself, what is going to make them honor a living will drawn up by a mere citizen?
You are in control, Terri's mistake was not to have one!
I'll make sure no one cuts off my water. The effects of dehydration are horrible.
Not true. Under the 1999 Florida law signed by Jeb Bush--created by the cabal that owns the hospice in which Terri is being murdered, a doctor can disregard even the written instructions of a patient who requests care. This business about having written instructions is just Prolefeed--to disguise the fact that involuntary euthanasia is already legal in Florida. Jeb Bush was right: everything that is being done to Terri is according to law. A law he signed in 1999.