Posted on 03/27/2005 11:48:41 AM PST by gwb43_2004
Demonstrators Mary Porta, kneeling, and others pray for Terri Schiavo, Easter Sunday, March 27, 2005, outside the hospice, where Terri resides, in Pinellas Park, Fla. Under increased security and with fading hopes, Terri Schiavo's parents asked supporters to return home to spend Easter Sunday with their families as the couple's severely brain-damaged daughter went a ninth day without food or water. (AP Photo/Steve Nesius)
Agree.
A CAT scan after the accident it showed that Princess Grace's brain had been damaged in two different places. One was from the trauma of the crash and the other appeared to have been a stroke, although it was impossible to tell if the stroke caused the accident or if the accident caused the stroke.
Princess Grace was put on life support and her family had to make the difficult decision of deciding whether or not to end the artificial life support. The family decided that they were going to "pull the plug" -as it is said.
sw
Uh...Best I remember, GHW Bush was prez when Ruby Ridge happened. It was one kid and Randy's wife killed. He was wounded and so was a family friend.
Oh, they killed the little boy's dog first.
Because there waqs a constitutional and lawfully binding treaty, and he sided with the state of Georgia in wanting to nullify that treaty - a treaty that was constitutional and legally binding, I repeat...
When it went to court, the supreme court ruled that the treaty was valid and constitutional - which it WAS - and Andrew Jackson went ahead and ordered the US Army to violate the lawful treaty anyway. In doing so, many many lives were lost.
Yeah, he was legally wrong. But who gives a s**t, right? After all, it was just a stupid treaty with some indians. It wasn't like they were really americans or anything...
Yeah, Jackson was a federalist scumbag, and is not someone who should be held up on a pedestal as an example of what a president should be.
Is this woman praying...or is she wanting others to pray to her?!?
The President & the Governor are not to blame! They did all they could within the confines of our Constitution.
What this tragic case demonstrates is that we must do all we can to get more conservative judges in our courts!
Admittedly I'm only an armchair analyst, but I agree. And I think he could have done so without loss of life.
This is a trite cliche from another, far different country than the America of 2005. That phrase dates to the long bygone era when the laws of this nation were grounded in the natural law concepts of the Constitution and the Biblical roots of Anglo-American common law. The prevailing legal philosophy in modern America, held by the Supreme Court, save Scalia, Thomas, and maybe Rehnquist, is positivism, which holds that law should not be based on eternal principles, but on the needs of society as perceived by legislators and judges. Law, as modern jurists use the term, is relativistic and situational, not objective and permanent.
I was not referring to President Bush, but to Governor Bush, in whose jurisdiction the Schiavo case resides. Secondly, we are talking about human life, not a school bond or the placement of a waste dump. Extraordinary measures are necessary in this case, rather than hiding behind the excuse of procedure, as Governor Bush has.
The fact is that the judiciary has asserted its supremacy over the legislative and executive branches, a process dating back to the early days of the Republic, when Chief Justice John Marshall asserted the authority of the Supreme Court to determine whether legislation passed by Congress is constitutional, in contrast with English common law and the intent of the Founding Fathers. After World War II, that power was expanded by the Warren Court and its successors to act as a super-legislature in effect. School integration, "one man one vote" state and local legislative bodies, abortion on demand, abolition of local laws banning pornography, and most recently abolition of the death penalty for convicted criminals under the age of 18 are examples of the Supreme Court acting as a super-legislature.
At one time, judicial overreach was challenged by Presidents such as Jackson and Lincoln. But that was a bygone era. Our GOP leaders are not made of the same stuff.
As for your statement, "If you don't like the laws, get them changed.", that is hollow rhetoric. Judges on the Federal level are appointed for life. While many states elect their judiciary, these elections are usually heavily influenced by special interest groups, especially trial lawyers, and the voters are generally clueless relative to the candidates' judicial philosophy. Since the other branches of government have not effectively challenged judicial power, judges feel that they have carte blanche, and their perception is wholly correct.
As far as it goes, the GOP holds the Presidency and both houses of Congress, thanks in part to the hard work of Christian conservatives whom some FReepers scorn because the latter have swallowed the mainstream culture's anti-Christian kool-aid. The same control exists in Florida with regard to the governorship and the legislature. Yet all are powerless before the might of the judiciary.
The political system in this nation is seriously broke. Frankly, I don't know that it can be fixed, humanly speaking.
"Justice Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it!" - President Andrew Jackson"
Thank you for this bit of sanity and education. We can't blindly tow the party line like little robots and expect things to change for the better at the same time.
Our elected leaders are letting us down bigtime. How long have we conservatives had majorities in the House and Sentate now, and have had a Repub. President and Republican dominated SCOTUS? And yet the liberals, through judicial tyranny, are trampling on our civil and religious rights from sea to shining sea.
You're absolutely correct, but I think the base is a little too busy calling Jeb and the President murderers.
Maybe next week we can get back to business.
Okay, I can accept that. Still, the principle that the executive is not a servant of the judiciary is what I am using the quote to enunciate. I'll agree that Jackson was wrong in that matter, however, he was not wrong in asserting the power of the executive - just wrong in what he did with it.
In this case, asserting the power of the executive is what needs to be done to protect the right to life of an American citizen. There is no law that authorizes any judge to put any American citizen to death without a jury trial, and it's the responsibility of the executive to step in and protect her rights where the judiciary has failed.
In what way have you stuck your neck out on Teri's behalf, Mr/Ms Crusader? The title "Crusader", not to mention your words, would indicate that you are out there leading the charge and setting the example for those you are critizing for not doing enough.
....YES, No one will be protected now! Just like are babies after Roe vs Wade, a precedent is set. Soon our handicapped, Autistic, any infirm to be subject to the same treatment.
Whether the Bush Boy's could do more is questionable, but if Terry dies it will be on their watch, thus part of their Legacy.
Ok, so we agree on that, and the quote IS powerful. However, one thing to keep in mind - if we "allow" our elected leaders to "assert the power of the executive", even if they are not legally able to, how can we complain when some other leader of ours decides to do the same thing for what we view as the wrong reasons?
Just my thoughts :)
Your tag line is more prescient than your comment.
And how was Andrew Jackson disputing the SC's rightful assertion of an existing treaty a case of fighting 'judicial overreach'?
I think my tagline sums up what I believe in a nutshell...
A large percentage are the usual suspects.
I am so sad for my country right now. Elected republicans can't seem to do much of anything but stand around and wring their hands. It doesn't help that other so called conservatives on this site feed into this pathetic notion. I would like to hear there ideas on what should happen now. Maybe the President can nicely ask Judge Greer to resign. There we go, that should work.
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.