I sense that this vile spawn of Clinton judge has decided to allow Michael Schaivo to put Terri Schiavo down more cruelly and callously than the State of Florida allows its animal control officers to put down a rabid dog.
Folks, whatever the outcome, and I pray that the feeding tube will be reinstalled, we must remember all of the politicians who have maintained that Terri should die. We must never let the dems to be in this position again. I will campaign hard against any politician that has bemoaned the Congressional vote as wrong. (Hear that Ginny Brown-Waite) Let's keep Terri in our prayers and hope for the best.
Show me a federal judge and I'll show you a self-absorbed, egomaniac who's first instinct is to deny power to anyone other than his own law clerk.
He's going to rule against the parents. He's busy writing an opinion in which he blasts Congress for passing an unconstitutional law and interfering with the "Constitutional right of privacy."
Hypothetically, if, (and this is a big IF) a person happens to injure another person causing them to have an injury which renders them disabled - if that person were to just happen to think that they would get by with it if they happened to manage to have the injured person killed - well, their lack of peace would only just begin, in spades.
Having stated this, I do not know what happened to Terri to cause this condition which she is in. Shiavo is innocent unless proven guilty, of course, so I'm certainly not accusing him of anything.
That's where this legal argument simply falls apart. I've always hated this religious liberty argument in this case. It's weak.
The judge should have laughed this moron lawyer out of his court. Moreover, our ancestors used to tar & feather such charlatans. Civil rights violated....how about Terri's civil right to live?
Terri, no matter how many judges have condemned her to death, has struggled to live. She continues to survive. The fate her husband and agreeable judges is worse than putting an acquitted man through another trial...isn't that double jeopardy?
This is the 3rd time a man's cruel death sentence has fallen upon her innocent head.
Looks like we've got another hard-hearted, hard-ass judge. Judge Whittemore. And damn her stupid lawyers for being so ineffective.
Ugh!
"Substantial likelihood of prevailing on the merits" is only ONE consideration. The other is "immediate and irreparable harm" which will OBVIOUSLY occur.
I think one trumps the other in this case. If the subject dies, the case will die and we'll never KNOW whether the parents will prevail on the merits, will we?
I imagine they dream of a new Nurenberg and build stick concentration camps in their spare time.