Replies

But that's because I believe the Republican Party is a useful vehicle to advance political goals that I believe in.

As do I, when they abandon conservatism they I am gone too.

Laws actually WERE changed to permit the judicial tyrants a way to back down and stop murdering Terri

Not at all. A law was narrowly crafted, they law that permits removal of nutrition is still there. It isn't that removal of nutrition isn't mentioned in the Florida Statues and is legal because there is no law against it, it is mentioned as being legal by the very act. So much for change. I can quote the law:
FS 765.101 (10) "Life-prolonging procedure" means any medical procedure, treatment, or intervention, including artificially provided sustenance and hydration, [...]
If they struck that law, we would have saved everyone.

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.

They are few, and they are being used. If they all left tomorrow, the people POSING as prolifers would be there trying to get on TV. There is the crux of my objection. You have seen me on here, and know I can't countenance starving a woman, but, I can't understand sacrifice thousands of lives for one.

"Life-prolonging procedure" means any medical procedure, treatment, or intervention, including artificially provided sustenance and hydration, [...]

This law was deliberately mis-interpreted.

Terri's tube is life-SUSTAINING, not -PROLONGING.

Back to Grim Greer and his cabalistic cohort of deathmonger-attorneys.

And lackadaisacal Governors.

Dear Dominick,

Yes, I agree, if they'd struck that law, the current legal arguments against the murderers would be stronger.

However, murderer greer's order is still illegal on the face. Your quotation of law includes:

"...including artificially provided sustenance and hydration,..."

Giving a cup of water to a disabled woman is hardly "artificial sustenance or hydration." She swallows her own saliva (or did when she was permitted by the murderers to have any). But the murderer greer forbids even offering her a cup of water.

Furthermore, I'm reasonably sure that this applies to end-of-life circumstances, not to the severely disabled.

Finally, as the murderer m. schiavo has violated the legal obligations of guardianship for some years, it is not legally legitimate to rely on the authority of a clearly-discredited and clearly-conflicted guardian (can you say "he's got a live-in and a couple of illegitimate kids to support?").

We have tyrannical rule by judges. They have twisted the written law where they could and disregarded the written law when they had to, in order to achieve their own purposes.

Political leaders who fail to see the overthrow of the constitutional order inherent in this situation will be unable to fix what needs fixing.

sitetest