Dear Dominick,
You accuse others of hysteria, and then you write stuff like this:
"The two of you sound like you would be more comfortable at the DU."
Why? Because I'm not connected at the belly-button to the Republican Party?
Look, I pull a straight "R" ticket every election.
But that's because I believe the Republican Party is a useful vehicle to advance political goals that I believe in.
If there comes a time when the Republican Party can no longer serve as that vehicle, then, hey, I'll try to figure out something else.
Being a Catholic is marked indelibly on my soul. Being a Republican isn't.
"How do we stop and unjust law? We have it changed by our elected officials."
Well, Dominick, we actually got our elected representatives to get off their fat duffs and take a tepid swing at this. Laws actually WERE changed to permit the judicial tyrants a way to back down and stop murdering Terri.
And the tyrants ignored the law.
Of course, even Florida state law, which says you may withdraw ARTIFICIAL means of sustenance and hydration, does not say that you may refuse to offer a cup of water to a disabled person. Even Florida state law gives NO judge the authority to prevent someone from offering a cup of water to a disabled person.
Thus, the murderer greer is not currently following ANY law but of his own making. His orders are illegal on their face.
I'm no longer convinced the problem is that we haven't elected enough Republicans. I am fairly persuaded that the judges have developed a collective mindset that they're the ones who ultimately make the law. I've become persuaded that the rulings of the courts in this case are more about slapping down anyone who dares question their supremacy and less about Terri Schiavo. I believe that the actions of the Florida state legislature and the US Congress were doomed to fail, not because the judges have it out for Terri, but because the judges take these laws as an affront to the rule of judges.
This is their way of telling us that THEY, THE JUDGES, are in charge, and God help anyone who gets in their way.
That being the case, I'm not really sure how to solve that problem. Either of the Bush boys (all hat, no cattle) could have used their executive power to take Terri into protective custody.
Then, possession being nine points of the law, they could have ensured that she be sustained while they fought it out in the legislatures and the courts. They could have invited the courts' further lawlessness in issuing then-impotent judgments against the executive, and said, "If the legislature (or Congress) thinks I've done wrong to prevent the immediate murder of an innocent woman, let them impeach me for upholding her basic, fundamental human rights."
And hey, if they actually WERE impeached and convicted, and removed form office, at the very least, they would have done right.
But I kinda doubt that would have happened.
However, what we've seen is that the Bush boys just don't have the balls to challenge judicial supremacy.
Well, that's a problem. If the leaders of the Republican Party are unwilling to use their elected offices legitimately to challenge this illegitimate doctrine that the black-robed tyrants are our masters, then I'm not sure that they will be the vehicles to fix things that need fixing.
Perhaps tactically, we might stick with them to delay our slide into full totalitarianism. That could be a legitimate part of an overall strategy. Perhaps we need to do something else.
If the Republican Party's highest leaders fail us, it isn't wrong to re-evaluate what to do next.
As for what folks outside the hospice are or aren't doing hasn't been the focus of anything I've discussed, except to give praise to pro-life folks who are down there trying to do what's right. I know that at least some of the people there fit into that category.
sitetest