Posted on 03/21/2005 12:05:39 PM PST by Wolfstar
"I hope we remember these arguments when some skid is on death row i doubt the rats will be sayin the federal courts dont have authority"
Agreed. Precedent is being set here.
Your answer tells me where you stand. That's all I needed to know.
As much as I detest what is happening to Terri Schiavo and her family, and as much as I believe that her husband is scum, I think that short of a miracle, this case is lost under the law.
I also don't think that this action by Congress is anything more than a dog and pony show for the benefit of the voters.
The job of the Courts is to interpret the law as written, and to the best of my knowledge Terri Schiavo will starve to death because unfair and inhuman as it is, the law stands on the side of her husband.
I hope we learn from this, and set in place legislature to correct this gross injustice.
Pray for Terri and her family.
I believe that what is required at this point is to establish a standard of human behavior
The Declaration of Independence of the Thirteen Colonies
....We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
Absent the direct and personally expressed wishes of an individual.
No person shall be deprived of the basic needs of life; food and water.
Bump=0)
I have to go, so please don't misconstrue my absence as acceptance of your position, but as this thread goes on, you now argue that the federal court has jurisdiction. But it has jurisdiction explicitly because of Congress's action, nothing else. Even the most activist federal judge would not have taken up this case but for Congress's constitutional intervention. If the federal judiciary thought otherwise, presumably this hearing wouldn't even ben occurring today on jurisdictional grounds.
Thats exactly what will happen. The husband is the legal guardian. You can pi$$ and moan about it, but the decisions about his wife will be found to be his. I wouldn't want it any other way. Quality of husband be dammed. Small Gov't means small Gov't. not just when convenient to the right.
Very shaky ground, as this act of Congress essentially throws out several hundered years of laws regarding the relationship between a husband a wife.
But now they would be ruling on whether the law is constitutional.
She hasn't gotten out of bed in 13 years. She can't eat or drink on her own. Her brain scans show no activity.
I agree. I just don't think that Congress should do so.
Echo echo.
Congress did not involve itself in the individual case of Roe v Wade. That was decided by the courts -- ultimately the U.S. Supreme Court. In the 30+ years since, Congress still has not enacted a law to challenge the decision or overturn Roe v. Wade legislatively. Congress could, for example, by generating a Constitutional amendment to ban abortion and then sending it out to the states for ratification. Congress has not done that because it knows such an amendment would never be ratified.
The federal courts have not yet considered whether her Constitutional rights were violated by this state court decision. Explain to me how they can take this woman's life without even giving her an attorney, except the one hired by her husband to represent himself, and without giving her an MRI, when it's the functioning of her brain that is at issue. That can't be due process.
A husband and wife? This is 200 years of tradition, where a purported husband has a common law wife for 10 years, as well as 2 children by the common law wife, and yet is still recognized as the husband for purposes of making life and death decisions about his wife? We don't recognize polygamy in this country. And the question traditionalists should ask, like me, is how this purported husband was able to remain as the guardian in this case. Can anyone explain that? Very bizarre. So, don't tell us about the husband-wife relationship when Michael Schiavo moved on with another woman without the benefit of a divorce.
Well, that's the great thing about the representative branches of our government. You can change them. Not so easy when it comes to judges.
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.