Posted on 03/21/2005 12:05:39 PM PST by Wolfstar
Clause 1: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
Clause 2: To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;
Clause 3: To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
Clause 4: To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
Clause 5: To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
Clause 6: To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;
Clause 7: To establish Post Offices and post Roads;
Clause 8: To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
Clause 9: To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;
Clause 10: To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;
Clause 11: To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
Clause 12: To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
Clause 13: To provide and maintain a Navy;
Clause 14: To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
Clause 15: To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
Clause 16: To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
Clause 17: To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, byCession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;--And
Clause 18: To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
Yes, I am well acquainted with the English language. It is a simple matter to read a statute and understand what it says. It is an entirly different matter to rean a holding and find out what the staute means when one considers transcendent liberty rights, penumbras and outlying galaxies.
Typos aside a course. :-}
Well, sort of. You see, a guardian can't impose wishes that are contrary to the patient's wishes. That is against the law. In this case, part of the beef is that the law erred on a factual matter, specifically, whether or not Terri would starve herself to death in these circumstances, were she able to make that choice.
The count found that to be the case. In other words, the court found TERRI's wishes. Not Michaels.
The entity with the power is the PATIENT.
It's right there in the beginning, Art. 1, Sect. 8, Clause 1, where it deals with imposts [and by extension, the impostors]. Read broadly, it gives the Congress the power to impose themselves wherever they might wish...
Very good technical point. I accede.
Not quite. You have to read the statute, find out any other statutes that may affect that statute, and find precedent that affects how that statute is applied. That precedent may reference other statutes, or reference other precedent, which may reference other statutes or precedent, and on and on and on.
Yes, I understand that all. Nothing in the holdings, the law or the Florida Constitution gives judges the power to be both the proxy and the trier of fact. But I am open to you correcting that staement. Good luck.
Well, I'm sure the holy rollers eager for another political football and kowtowing from their big-government GOP puppets are eagerly searching out their next brain-dead martyr.
You got it.
Guess she couldn't answer that one!
The federal judge addressed that in his ruling.
If a party feels that justice has not been done on the state level, they have every right to petition the Federal Government to have them take a look at it to insure state guidelines were met and the Constitutional rights were not violated, remember the 2000 election?
The federal judges addressed Roe v Wade in their rulings.
Now you're just making stuff up. Judge Whittemore cited plenty of precedent, but he did not cite Roe v. Wade.
LOL, get real.
As is Michael Schiavo.
"The fact is, this man should not still be legal guardian of this woman."
No, the FACT here is that he's still her guardian, and that's the only fact that the Court can consider; the government has no power to pass judgment on the morality of the Schiavo's marital status, only on the legality of it.
If the argument is that Terri should not die because of the lack of a document expressly stating her wishes to that effect, then you must equally accept that lacking a document saying that she would divorce Michael for behaving in the manner that he's behaved, she shouldn't be divorced from him.
In other words, don't assume anything at all about the wishes of an individual incapable of making his or her wishes clear.
So what's left then?
Only the law is left, and the law is what we must turn to at this point to settle this exceptional case.
There could very well be issues with the law as written that makes the outcome of this case unsatisfactory to people like you and I, but the fact remains that we must now defer to the law, and if the law is found imperfect, then all that we can do is to fix the law in whatever manner the law allows us to fix it.
It is our ability to do this that makes for an orderly society.
As conservatives, we are willing to accept the real possibility of someone innocent being executed by the State because we recognize that greater justice may be served than the injustice which may affect an individual, it may be the same in Terri's case.
In her "vegetative" state, Terri Schiavo may accomplish for permanently disabled people what we as a society could not.
Pray for Terri, and rejoice her coming to His House, carried by flights of angels.
Oh, but if we fully sentient people could achieve one tenth in our lives of what Terri Schiavo will accomplish in her coma.
What else should the Court consider if not the law?
None of which remove guardianship from Michael as neither forces a divorce.
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.