Posted on 04/07/2005 5:34:06 PM PDT by News Hunter
Edited on 04/07/2005 5:39:05 PM PDT by Sidebar Moderator. [history]
But he did it anyway, in the interest of time because delays may cost this woman her life.
There have been half a dozen threads on this over the past day and a half. FReepers have managed to confirm at least the peripheral details of the case - the hospice does have a patient by that name, the attorneys representing the case have been contacted and confirm they are handling said case, one FReeper even said the judge confirmed many of the details.
What we DON'T have is anyone denying any aspect of the story.
Sorry, I don't know what you're talking about re. any alleged "ego boosts" some pro-Lifers feel upon hearing news that helpless innocents are being denied water and food by court order.
For folks with any good sense of morality, outrage against such evil actions are to be expected. Indeed, it would be extremely frightening if we *weren't* outraged.
..outrage *is* to be expected..
Like my husband said tonight - state's rights, but if we were residents of Georgia, we'd be saying WHAT?
Hey, my brillance is here only to serve my fellow Freepers! And dare I add, Mankind? :-)
Well, don't you know that if the MSM doesn't report t, it didn't happen. (/sarcasm)
That's why I said SOME. I have read nasty, vile stuff about anyone who doesn't fit SOME people's definition of pro-life (not this thread per se, many Schiavo ones and such). I am saddened that it seems to be okay to hate if LIFE is involved. Some invoke the word and stiffle any discussion and I think there is ego gratification involved.
I know many have pure beliefs and ambitions, hence the SOME.
For the big words, spell checking is our friend.
Do you think it was wrong to kill Terri Shiavo? Yes/No?
Based solely on what I have read I believe that the state law should have required written living wills in cases like Terri's. I believe the judge may have not considered potential conflicts of interest, but I believe he followed the law. I believe that the 40 plus judges who participated in 30 some reviews believed that conflict of interest concerns were insufficient. I believe that the Guardian ad Litem's independent report completely vindicated the Judge, Michael, and the doctors who made the PVS diagnosis. With all of that, I am sorry that Terri died, and I hope that states in the future will provide consideration for feeding tube technology and living wills.
And I am sorry that the federal government violated the Tenth Amendment for political purposes, and I am sorry that the most extreme and shameful people and events made everyone's life at Woodside far more miserable than it might have been.
For many of us who try and maintain a conservative approach to life, there is simply no YES/NO answer to many things. I'm sure for you there is. I believe I have given you far more time than you either wanted or deserved, given the beginning of your post.
A good guy and a grammar nut, too! Gotta love it.
(okay, maybe you're not a guy, meant it generically!)
I, now , see that you have been using the same source.
Great minds think alike...only mine thinks a little slower. :-)
Not sure about you, but I would be asking some questions to find out the real story, since the one at the beginning of this thread is hardly the whole story. If it appeared that the judge was incompetent, I would look to either impeach him, or work to make sure he was not reelected. But from what I have heard, the judge seems to believe that both sides were completely in agreement. So I'm not sure if any incompetence exists.
It is strange, that an awful lot of Freepers here have suddenly taken a liking to a law degree....
LOL. You're in bad shape if this poor old mind can beat ya!
Anyway, given some of the insane posts here by normally analytical Freepers, I am very surprised few seem at all interested in a different story.
That's what concerns me. It's like some WANT another Terri story. I'd be thrilled to learn it's a well-meaning granddaughter and some confused relatives.
As soon as you heard the granddaughter found a judge willing to give her an ex parte hearing on Friday, with a ruling good for the weekend, it's at that point you should have immediately begun to doubt the granddaughter's interest in grandma's good health as well as the judge's integrity.
The 40 judges you cite reviewed part of the process governing how the original case could be handled on appeal and they found that all OK. Only one hearing of fact was ever held as far as anyone knows.
Xena - I like you, and from what I have read of your posts, I respect you as well.
But your above statement sounds a lot like the mindset we hear on the Left, and further demonstrates the bizarre irony of this sick circus - i.e., we've got the Left - party of compassion and sensitivity - calling for her death, and folks on the Right crying to the government to "cure what ails them". Like it or not, honorable cause or not - it's the same thing the Left did in the 2000 election, and we've validated it.
And this won't be the last circus, to be sure. Count on it.
Not exactly. The 2d CA was very involved and in fact delayed the removal of the tube and ordered a 5 doctor review of Terri's prognosis in 2001. On another occasion the 2d CA ruled against Greer in his denial of new evidence. And it was the chief judge, I believe that ordered a guardian ad litem to prepare a report, which as we know was not favorable to the Schindler's motions. So I believe that the CA was quite involved throught the past 4 years at least.
Or are you of the school of opinion that the courts are not part of the government's apparatus?
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.