Replies

It would only stand up in a court of law where the judge APPLIES AND USES what is already written as law.

Unfortunately, as you have witnesses, this country is now run by an oligarchy, we are no longer a government run by a representative form ... the judiciary has taken over and is making their own laws at their individual whims.

we are no longer a government run by a representative form ... the judiciary has taken over and is making their own laws at their individual whims.

OH nicmarlo, this is so sadly true!!!

Excuse me I stand to be corrected. Oregon is the only state that has an euthanasia law. There is now currently a law being discussed in California about another euthanasia state law, but it needs the approval of the governor.

The reason why most states shy away from passing a comprehensive euthanasia law is because of voter opposition to it. Even in Oregon, many religious organizations are working to overthrow Oregon's euthanasia laws, even to the extent of advocating a change in legislative leadership of that state.

What I understand is that the common law (judiciary laid down law) provision on euthanasia permits it only when the patient is in permanent irreversible vegetative state. That means he could no longer eat, talk, walk, etc.. He is a complete vegetable and his condition is deem irreversible.

The requirements in performing this kind of euthanasia is the consent of the patient or his guardians. Without this consent, euthanasia may not be performed. Many states explicitly prohibit euthanasia in their books.

Advocates of this kind of euthanasia contend that it will save a lot of expenses for the state or the ones taking care of him in taking care of the severely ill and incapacitated person who is in the state of permanent and irreversible vegetative condition.

There is a difference between the terminally ill and the one who is in a vegetative condition. In the one terminally ill, death is expected any time and the purpose of his life support system is merely to prolong his life as far as medical technology is capable. Usually, doctors could only prolong the life of the terminally ill by a few months or even a year until death overcomes the patient. In a patient suffering from a permanent and irreversible vegetative condition, death will not occur for as long as the life support systems attached to his body is not withdraw. In Terri Schiavo's case, she was kept alive for more than 15 years by life support systems. If her feeding weren't withdraw, she could have reach her old age before death finally overcomes her. Terri Schiavo was then 45 years old when she died. Her life support system is capable of sustaining her for the next 30 years.

A person who is terminally ill does not need euthanasia because death is expected any time. It is the one who is in a vegetative state where euthanasia may be applied because death is not imminent. In Terri Schiavo's case, she was kept alive for 15 years by her life support system.

Those who oppose euthanasia say that it is murder. Many of those who oppose euthanasia oppose it on religious grounds. They contend that there is no excuse for murder, even if it is mercy killing.