Posted on 03/30/2005 8:45:00 AM PST by stan_sipple
the (relatively silent) majority of Americans feel(s) that the most compassionate treatment for Terri Schiavo - as well as the proper legal course of action - is to let her vegetative existence end, as advocated by her legal guardian, her husband.
For Republicans who consider their party a captive of the religious right on matters like medical research and right-to-die legislation and now legislative intrusion into the judicial system, there is a way to at least feel more comfortable with their political consciences.
That way is to leave a party whose leadership is currently attempting to leave behind in the dust of American constitutional history the principle of separation of powers that has served this country well for more than 200 years.
the religious conservatives deeply involved in the case believe in an afterlife - eternal life in circumstances considerably more appealing than lying in a hospital bed in a vegetative state for 15 years, being kept alive by food and liquids fed into your body through a hole in your abdomen.
Wouldn't the more compassionate course be to release Terri from a vegetative existence in the belief you are sending her on to a better life after death?
(Excerpt) Read more at omaha.com ...
The World-Herald was conservative through the 1950s, if I remember right.
Maybe we can let them stay if they pay one of those Koran submission taxes.
Nonsense. My understanding is that the Pope, though physically infirm, is still aware mentally. If the Pope were to slip into a PVS it would be up to his guardian to decide whether or not his feeding tube should be removed (barring the existence of a living will).
According to their standards, he is now "sub-human"
Strawman argument. Nobody has called Terri Schiavo "sub-human."
World Herald while nominally Republican thinks that Bob Kerry, Warren Buffet can do no wrong, actually the once more liberal Lincoln Journal Star now will endorse Republican candidates
This isn't a religious issue to me. It's a life issue.
The left is really panicked by the emergence fo the majority conservative force.
Well, some people have the impression it is still "conservative," but I think it's only a facade.
I mean, yeah, sure, while the Omaha World-Herald supported George Bush both times for the presidency and all that, and generally endorses Republicans even if conservative, its editorial policy since circa the 1970s has generally usually most of the time on other issues taken the usual typical "moderate" to "hard" left stance of affluent liberals; on things such as abortion, euthanasia, taxes, governmental spending it is difficult to differentiate between the Omaha World-Herald and the New York Times.
That is on their editorial pages, I mean.
ARTICLE III, Section I
The Judges, both of the Supreme Court and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shat, at stated Times, receive for their services, a compensation, which shall not be diminished during their continuance in office."
Obviously, there is a behaviour question that could be raised. If they dissolved the lower federal courts (because they can't get rid of the Supreme Court), the Supreme Court would have to hear the hundreds of thousands of cases filed each year. If you think that's fine and the states should handle everything, you wouldn't be all that wrong, constitutionally speaking, but that is the exact issue that most people are raising in this post: "the federal government should be able to do something about it."
ARTICLE III, Section I
The Judges, both of the Supreme Court and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their services, a compensation, which shall not be diminished during their continuance in office."
Obviously, there is a behaviour question that could be raised. If they dissolved the lower federal courts (because they can't get rid of the Supreme Court), the Supreme Court would have to hear the hundreds of thousands of cases filed each year. If you think that's fine and the states should handle everything, you wouldn't be all that wrong, constitutionally speaking, but that is the exact issue that most people are raising in this post: "the federal government should be able to do something about it."
A whole host of courts and medical experts disagree.
You are so wrong here.....she has been called sub-human, as has many who are disabled. Not only in these words but in other terms as well, by many on the left
Example, please.
He is in that pack of supposed anarchists with foam coming out of their mouths. As he stated in post # 35 , "We are a nation of laws, not me."
he is now an outlaw. ;)
A HISTORY OF THE CONSTITUTION
The United States Constitution was constructed on September 17, 1787 after months of conflicting views, heated debates and clashing ideas finally yielded to compromise and thoughtful reconsiderations. The founders of the Constitution were delegates appointed by the state legislatures to represent each state's welfare. They had first convened in the Philadelphia statehouse as a quorom of 55 emissaries on May 25, 1787. Of the thirteen original states, only independent-minded Rhode Island declined to participate. The group's express original purpose was to revise the Articles of Confederation, our nation's first constitution that was constructed in 1777 after the Revolutionary War with Great Britain.
In theory you are correct that it is a creation of the people, but it was done through their representatives in much the same way as the people can amend it today. Speech, press and voting rights keep it functioning in the true interests of the people (at least that's the way it is supposed to work).
World Herald liberal slant even goes to covering the Catholic church, they always try to contrast the Omaha diocese more favorably with the more conservative Lincoln diocese
Hmmmm, I my have to rethink my position on this issue. They would be going to a better place, and it sure would make earth a better place, hmmmm sounds like a win/win .... hmmmmm. Maybe we should, for the greater good of course. ..... let me get back to you on that after I think on it awhile.
Hold it! Hold it! I'm giving it back. Geez ... a little icon theft and you want me sent away, and for good! ;)
Most people are basing their decision opn left-wing pro-death newspapers and TV.
So we have been blessed as a people with freedom and charity and wealth.
While some would say that the social medicine in Europe or other parts of the world is great they have never had to wait for months for a test to be done or for surgery to correct a correctable situation, or as in some
countries (now it looks as though ours in following suit) not given any medical care because they are old or the doctor feels they have no chance to live. LIFE is supreme there is no return when the light goes out of their
eyes and the breathing stops, one cannot speak or touch or laugh or cry with the departed loved one. It is over. For those of us who believe in transference of our soul to a better place there may be the chance of meeting once again but I am not sure it will be the same as we now have in this great land and in the joy of feeling the air on our skin and the touch of a loved one.
Life taken can never be restored. Every effort should have been made to rehabilitate this young woman or allow her parents to keep her in their loving arms. Once gone there is no return. Just as the movie I Accuse, in Germany gave Hitler and the Nazi the popular support to start killing the infirmed and the so called nonhumans, this decision may be the catalyst for further taking of gods gift to his people LIFE.
Written by a delegation and approved by state Constitutional Conventions (who I'm sure we can all agree are better representatives of the people than Congress).
To my knowledge, no single-issue party has ever elected anyone to anything (other than to local elections). I do agree with you on the assessment that now, if the nuclear option isn't exercised to break the Dems' obstruction, a lot of Christians may walk away from politics, and the GOP will be consigned again to minority status.
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.