To: ambrose
Yep. Plenty of AlGores on this thread, ready to keep judge-shopping, gaming the system, pulling all sorts of legal maneuvers, obstructing, delaying, obfuscating, getting legislative intervention - all to contradict the legal process which got us here.
Apparently, judicial activism is perfectly fine as long as it's in your favor.
After all, every decision to this point has been "illegal" according to this thread, so more legal maneuvering is obviously the solution.
169 posted on
03/17/2005 11:07:46 PM PST by
Hank Rearden
(Never allow anyone who could only get a government job attempt to tell you how to run your life.)
To: Hank Rearden
This idiocy got its start when we began making things like "carjacking" federal crimes. Hardly anyone truly believes in any sort of Constitutional principles anymore... it all comes down to "I like it - good. I don't like it - bad."
189 posted on
03/17/2005 11:12:11 PM PST by
ambrose
(....)
To: Hank Rearden
There are critical times when we should follow the
SPIRIT of the law, and NOT the LETTER of the law. This situation is ONE of those times.
192 posted on
03/17/2005 11:13:18 PM PST by
TAdams8591
(The call you make may be the one that saves Terri's life!!!!!!)
To: Hank Rearden
Never mind the "right to life" or "right to die".
The bottom line is that Terri is at the mercy of her husband, instead of having a guardian who would put Terri's interests first. It's about protecting someone who is not able to protect herself.
Why would it bother you to know that her parents are taking care of her and surrounding her with love?
Her husband didn't care about her, he shoved her into a hospice to die, while he is living it up with his girlfriend.
Why don't you ask yourself, why wouldn't any reasonable person just let Terri be taken care of by her parents?
Her husband was limiting access to Terri by her parents, he wouldn't allow them to look at her medical records, etc.
210 posted on
03/17/2005 11:18:44 PM PST by
FairOpinion
(It is better to light a candle, than curse the darkness.)
To: Hank Rearden
"Yep. Plenty of AlGores on this thread, ready to keep judge-shopping, gaming the system, pulling all sorts of legal maneuvers, obstructing, delaying, obfuscating, getting legislative intervention - all to contradict the legal process which got us here.
Apparently, judicial activism is perfectly fine as long as it's in your favor."
The judge in charge of the rulings in favor of starving her is selectively allowing some testimony and refusing other testimony. So much of the courtroom is drama and theater, and the outcomes are definitely influenced by the individual bias of the judge in charge.
That being said, those who are defending Terri are free to choose to use some aspects of the imperfect legal system against other aspects of the legal system.
358 posted on
03/18/2005 1:45:55 AM PST by
Bushforlife
(I've noticed that everybody that is for abortion has already been born. ~Ronald Reagan)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson