Replies

Is it the case that no one can rightfully think that is an immoral law, and disobey it, morally speaking?

Sure. But that "one" has to be able to take some action, which is why I mentioned Jeb Bush. You or I have no standing in this case.

And do you agree or disagree with the Pope on the matter of nutrition and hydration being "ordinary means" of care, under normal circumstances?

Yes, but you have to remember that JPII's pronouncement last year was the first attemtped resolution of this issue in 400 years. His has not been the constant teaching of the Church. We were taught in moral theology in the seminary that the withholding of sustenance for someone in a PVS was a possibility, depending on the prognosis and commensurate burden.

Sure. But that "one" has to be able to take some action, which is why I mentioned Jeb Bush. You or I have no standing in this case.

Stupid, just plan stupid. You never cease to amaze me, Sinkspur. What could "standing" possibly have to do with an act of civil disobedience? "Standing" is a legal term giving someone the right to bring a civil or criminal action. Everyone is way past that now. The discussion is civil disobedience. If you don't know what you're talking about...just shut up.

As far as the Pope's statement on nutrition and hydration, what exactly is your answer to the question posed? You say you agree with the Pope, but then you equivocate by referring to your seminary as a counter magisterium I guess. My impression from this Texas 2-step is that you don't believe in the Pope's statement ("it is not an infallible statement, you see") and that you think the boys over at your seminary got it right.

Wondering if you would be so kind as to tease out this special extra-ecclesial teaching of your seminary masters as well. Might be of interest to all.

Well, I haven't denounced Jeb Bush. It's not for me to demand that he engage in extra-legal behavior (although there is some argument that he had or has the authority, regardless).

I do think it was dumb to get up in a press conference and say "We have the authority to take custody," and then wait for the judge to issue a restraining order before acting.

That said, he made a serious and protacted effort to work within the legal framework, corrupt as it is, to save Terri. He deserves credit for that.

I can't say exactly what I would have done in his position, because I'm not in his position.

I would say, though, that if he would have chosen an extralegal avenue, he would have been morally justified, and I would have fully supported him in that.

It was illegal to protect Jews in Nazi Germany. Thankfully, there were many brave people who did so in violation of the law.