[William Terrell]

You have not understood a word that I've said. As a conservative, you're supposed to think. If all you do is emote, you're just a liberal.

[FBD]

>"You have not understood a word that I've said."<

-I don't think so...I believe I understand your position, and what you have been trying to convey. But we have entirely different concerns.

Correct me if I'm wrong:

You are concerned with this case setting precedence, for the State (Congress) to deprive the wishes of an adulterous husband who wants to end the life of his mentally incapacitated wife. You believe that is an invasion of his spousal rights, and also his wife's wishes.
You are concerned this may deny future spousal rights, their invalid spouses *right* to die, if all there is to attest to their wishes is the spouses word. In short, you are concerned about their *right to death*.
Am I correct?

- I am:
#1. Concerned with the gradual public acceptance of active euthanasia without the consent of the infirm. It is even becoming hospital policy in some countries. IE; 'The Groningen Protocol'.
#2. Concerned with future precedence of the State (the courts) to actively order euthanizing of the infirm, who are incapable of defending themselves.
In short, I am concerned about their *right to life*.

>"If all you do is emote, you're just a liberal."<

I see.
- "All I'm doing is "emoting," therefore, I'm "just a liberal"
-I try not to pigeon hole people I disagree with into a category, in an attempt to diminish their point of view. I think it's intellectually lazy.

regards