Posted on 03/29/2005 2:11:48 PM PST by AmericanInTokyo
Furthermore, we don't murder people because they can't feed themselves. That's outrageous! Don't even get me started on the self-proclaimed "paramilitaries" arresting Americans for trying to give water to a woman. It's nuts! and UnAmerican. It's the clinton position, in a nutshell.
What is American is disobedience to unjust laws. From our nations founding.
""We can't be fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans."
--William J. Clinton
I agree. Shameful scapegoating.
You win. I'm only 52 years old and a career military veteran. This is why I've become VERY bored with FR. I'm certain you have MUCH greater life experiences than I. If this is the best that FR has to offer, I am OUT OF HERE.
MODERATOR - pull my plug. This isn't worth the bandwidth.
You beat me, I'm only 46, but my kid is in Iraq. Don't leave. Just don't diss Freepers. We are on the same page, we just have to find that page.
The lawyers really screwed this up.
Interesting: "I know that there are other issues that need to be addressed. .... Let's work together to make Florida a better home for people with disabilities." Gotta say, I agree w/him here.
ping
I will not stop, because it is. And I apparently have many on this thread who agree with me on that, even though they disagree with me on Jeb's failure to act.
That's the way the left is framing it.
As well they should.
I see this as a Constitutional issue. This woman's rights are being trampled. Denied.
So do I. And that's exactly how I see the abortion issue, too.
Furthermore, we don't murder people because they can't feed themselves.
Agreed.
WRONG. You cannot see without cerebral cortex. You would be cortically blind. You could not follow with your eyes. You would have no recognition ability. You would have no emotion. Read up on your functional neuroanatomy before making such uninformed silly statements.
WRONG. You cannot see without cerebral cortex. You would be cortically blind. You could not follow with your eyes. You would have no recognition ability. You would have no emotion. Read up on your functional neuroanatomy before making such uninformed silly statements.
Oh, please. Let's go ahead and call a governor we used to appreciate as a friend of the Right a Pilate, a hypocrite, a party to murder, a coward, a loser... but please, dont' diss Freepers. We're just one happy family.
Uh oh, watch out! You will not be branded as "irrational" because you don't agree with flaglady! Facts be damned!
My nephew is also in Iraq, and I WILL diss Freepers when Freepers need to be dissed. I am trying to do what I can to ground my nephew's kids on a solid foundation. When Freepers think they don't need to be dissed, they have become Liberals. That said, hopefully we can find some middle ground somewhere.
Florida Statute ( Denying food and water is a 3rd degree felony)(There is much more in the statute, I copied this portion)
http://www.flsenate.gov/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0825/SEC102.HTM&Title=-%3E2004-%3ECh0825-%3ESection%20102#0825.102
A person who knowingly or willfully abuses an elderly person or disabled adult without causing great bodily harm, permanent disability, or permanent disfigurement to the elderly person or disabled adult commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
(2) "Aggravated abuse of an elderly person or disabled adult" occurs when a person:
(a) Commits aggravated battery on an elderly person or disabled adult;
(b) Willfully tortures, maliciously punishes, or willfully and unlawfully cages, an elderly person or disabled adult; or
(c) Knowingly or willfully abuses an elderly person or disabled adult and in so doing causes great bodily harm, permanent disability, or permanent disfigurement to the elderly person or disabled adult.
A person who commits aggravated abuse of an elderly person or disabled adult commits a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
(3)(a) "Neglect of an elderly person or disabled adult" means:
1. A caregiver's failure or omission to provide an elderly person or disabled adult with the care, supervision, and services necessary to maintain the elderly person's or disabled adult's physical and mental health, including, but not limited to, food, nutrition, clothing, shelter, supervision, medicine, and medical services that a prudent person would consider essential for the well-being of the elderly person or disabled adult; or
If you want to read the statute regarding exploitation of a disabled person's assets, it's here
http://www.flsenate.gov/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0825/SEC103.HTM&Title=-%3E2004-%3ECh0825-%3ESection%20103#0825.103
"Ok, then you're just delusional."
You must be a liberal. You fail to answer my question and resort to personal attacks and name calling.
Maybe one day I'll be as smart and self aware as you are and I too will be able to judge which lives are worthy of continued feeding and which ones aren't.
Looks like Jeb has a leg to stand on. Question is, will he use the other leg to impliment this or stand there like a stork.
Does Florida law permit a judge to toss a governor in jail for disagreeing with a judicial opinion and acting against it? If so, it's the only state in the union that allows it.
The process in every state I know would suggest a trial by impeachment before the legislature if there are serious breaches of law involved.
The matter being debated before the legislature would be twofold:
1) Is the executive co-equal to the judiciary?
2) Has an action taken by the executive in some way violated a law?
If the legislature determines the executive is co-equal to the judiciary, no law has been broken. Thus, there are no grounds for arrest.
The next matter to be debated is who makes the better argument on a law's constitutionality - the executive or the judiciary?
From that the legislature can determine whether it will accept the executive or judicial branchs' interpretation.
If the legislature decided the executive committed some serious breach of law, the legislature could vote to impeach. On the other hand, if the legislature determined the judiciary had committed some gross violation, the judges would be impeached.
This, I believe, places the matter of which branch is supreme in a constitutional question where it belongs - the legislature, the elected house of the people. (Thomas Jefferson says so.:-)
Good question! Only God and Jeb know the answer to that one!
Oh please, let's stop calling everyone we disagree with Pilate or Hitler. It's really immature.
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.