Posted on 03/24/2005 7:22:09 AM PST by ConservativeMan55
Edited on 03/24/2005 7:43:21 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
Andrew Jackson, Thomas Jefferson, to name two, would disagree with you. Not that thisa nation even closely resembles what they had in mind. Our modern nation's founder is Thomas Dewey, and it's philosophy comes from the French Revolution, summed up in one word 'liberte'.
It is a false doctrine, according to the original intent of the Constitution, that the Executive and Legislative Branches should be so powerless before the judiciary.
Suit yourself. I read Cruzan, and the Shiavo material, and all of it is phrased in terms of respecting the patient's wishes. Your blather that my spouse can her assert her wishes over mine notwithstanding, she can't.
Jeremiah 17:9 The heart is deceitful above all things,
and desperately wicked...
As defined by Florida State law, it is life support.
Thanks for the number. I called and they are working hard. The lady said they have been working on this for weeks.
Don't give up!
Yes, it is. Obviously, it is not prosecuted. Dead letter law.
I hurt to see anybody in Terri's condition, but the decision to not give her tube feedings should have been done initially....not 15 yrs in......
now, 15 yrs later, it smacks of convenience....
>>this one person.<<
Many times in history, one person has made all the difference.
According to FL statute food and hydration is considered life support. However, according to FL Statute law Terri is not in a PVS so, also according to FL statute law life support may not be withdrawn.
For over 600 years, according to the OED. (Though, in the present sense, only back to the 16th century.) Exactly how "pure" of an English language do you speak at home? Trying to cut out all the Norman influence?
Add this: Proverbs 11:4 "Riches profit little in the day of wrath, but righteousness delivers from death."
Your statement is not true, the decision to remove or continue life support, in absence of explicit documentation from the patient, falls on the next of kin.
If no document exists stating Terri's wish not to live being sustained by artificial means, then no document exists to the opposite either.
Neale Donald Walsch, Author of Conversations with God
"This book could be called 'God in the Courtroom.'"
But, the satute was changed in the interim that Terri was incapacitiated. That is, at the time she became incapacitated, food and water via a g-tube was not considered artifical life support.
Thank you so much, FBD. I hope that other will see it as well. SO many BRIGHT red flags on SO many counts with *husband* and company.
Some truths can't be made into butter toffee candy, so that moral toddlers will understand them. The fact is that those who don't support action to save Terri are nurturing a pro-death culture. Susan Estrich was lamenting Randall's use of the term "imperial judiciary." What else do you call a monster, but a monster?
I agree with that -- it makes no sense to me that Randall Terry wouldn't have had a crackerjack team to plead in Federal Court.
AFAIK, cremation was traditionally opposed by the Church, first because it was a widespread pagan practice and later because it was favored by "Freethinker" types as a way of symbolically denying the Resurrection. I believe th Church always allowed cremation in special circumstances (e.g., plague). I know it's used more frequently now, but I don't know if any kind of special permission has to be sought.
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.