[Deo volente]

NO State has the right to put an innocent, disabled woman to death by starvation and dehydration.

NO STATE. NO WAY.

[M. Dodge Thomas]

NO State has the right to put an innocent, disabled woman to death by starvation and dehydration.

NO STATE. NO WAY.

Certainly the majority here take that view.

The question is, are they also ready to to accept that if this is a matter of Federal rather that state jurisdiction the logic of the argument suggests that so are a lot of other issues (as various "medical marijuana" and "gay marriage") many here would prefer to see decided at the state level.

IMO, this is a lot like the question of removing the filibuster on SC confirmations: it's attractive to a lot of conservatives in the short run, but once we start down such roads IMO a lot of people here may be very unhappy over where they eventually take us.