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]
Mod note: Calls for violence will result in suspensions
Michael Schiavo has filed a petition with the Supreme Court asking them to stay out of the case.
Not if a biased Judge who refuses to recuse himself continues to short circuit the process.
Ivan
Yeah, Illinois sure has it's wackos. Most states do. But the problems you referred to are not symptomatic of the state's legal system being unable to handle important issues. The voters spoke, and the problems went away rather quickly. Jackson is a self-promoting buffoon, and no state legal system can (or should) shut him down completely. However, he holds no state office, and has no legal authority whatsoever.
Horse excrement. Obviously Michael's status as guardian is in question because it is still being argued. This is not the work of pro-life politicians as you suggest - it is her family who argue this. In the presence of this haze, she should be allowed to live. You are content to let Judge Greer short circuit this, and let her die.
Ivan
Wrong.
I read the transcripts and depositions.
All the judges have seen and heard the nurses accountants & considered them bogus.
Because the morality of it is left for God to Judge.
Where will Terri be better of?
Whose best interest are we defending here?
Terri's, or her parents?
She will be made whole again, and sit next to Him.
I don't WANT her to die, I want her to live, but the integrity of the system is worth more than one individual's life.
Fix the laws according to the law.
Then be happy for Terri, whole and happy again by His side.
Nevermind. I looked it up. "Suicide" is one of the choices, but so is "natural." I believe the system will further obfuscate the issue and use the term "natural."
This is absurd, of course, because if I went on a hunger strike to death, otherwise being in good health, the death certificate would say "suicide."
As has been pointed out, the principal judge in this case is suspect. Putting your faith in the infalliability of the judiciary is ridiculous.
Ivan
How many Judges have reviewed the case?
Close to 20 I believe.
Our laws are based on moral precepts. If the laws no longer defend the basic rights to Life, liberty and the puruit of happiness, then what good are they? They become mere word games we play in order to achieve an advantage.
You and I are not in a position to judge what Terri wants, nor can she speak for herself. What she wants is disputed. The choice is being made for her - and it is setting a dangerous precedent by having that choice be death. How many people will be killed by having this precedent set without account of their wishes - that we cannot know, but we can know that this precedent opens that door. Thus by killing Terri, the integrity of the law in performing its most basic functions to protect the right to life of citizens, is diminished.
It is likely Terri is going to die. WHen cases come based on this precedent and others die, I hope that you reflect on precisely what you supported and what has been unleashed by it.
Ivan
Fix the laws according to the law.
Then be happy for Terri, whole and happy again by His side.
Amen.
One judge did. The rest of the judges deferred to the first judge.
The nurses have said this week they were placed under a gag rule when answering the question as to why they didn't come forward sooner. If they're lying, fine. It seems everybody trying to keep this girl from being killed by her husband is a stone-cold liar. The only people capable of telling the truth in all of this are Team Schiavo.
I noticed you didn't answer or even touch on the other question. That's okay, it's a trick question. There's no answer.
By this logic, if someone leaves a sum of money for funeral expenses, there is "no harm" in just dumping the body somewhere and spending the cash on blackjack and hookers instead. Hey, the deceased no longer knows or cares....
Re: Opening the medical records of Terri Schiavo
There are allegations of abuse.
If evidence to convict a alleged crinal to death are in question - one usually asks to open the records - it's called freedom of information.
This is Especially true if it is a matter of life or death!
Those records need to be open to see if the allegations of abuse are true or not. It is not to be snooping! It is leaving nothing uninvestigated.
Yes, and disputes of this sort are settled according to the rule of law.
Everybody here understood this concept when it was Bill Clinton's ass on the hot seat.
Then why hasn't one court ruled in
favor of the Schindlers in all these
past years?
As has been said repeatedly, this process is being short circuited by judicial activism.
Everybody here understood this concept when it was Bill Clinton's ass on the hot seat.
Sophistry. There was no dispute Bill Clinton was guilty of perjury and obstruction of justice. There is plenty of dispute as to what Terri Schiavo's wishes actually are. Furthermore, it appears FLorida's statutes on euthanasia are far more flexible than most perjury laws.
Ivan
I can't answer that.
Nor can I use that question to justify killing a disabled woman. I just don't have that kind of blind faith in our system anymore.
Er, no.
If I say that I am the rightful King of England, that does not mean that the line of succession is being "argued" in any meaningful sense, unless and until I present some credible reason to have the existing legal determinations in the matter set aside. That has no more been accomplished in this case than it has in my hypothetical example.
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.