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]
By whom was he known for his conservatism?
It should be noted that the news media like to attach the "conservative" label to bad people who are anything but, such as "conservative Rep. Gary Condit".
'tis the nature of the forum, and is a human weakness to be imprecise in expression, to jump to conclusions, and sometime, to be snippy about it.
I think you'll agree that our exchanges have been civil, and that the thrust of them has been to illuminate the questions and issues, the gaps in the reports, if you will.
And I've been forthright in letting readers know my bias (as if it isn't clear!), while speculating that even if the first story is true, and even if Mae is starved/dehydrated to death, the law will find no inexcusable wrong.
LOL. Yes, I was referring to the subjective nature of the second.
http://www.sptimes.com/2005/03/06/Tampabay/Quiet_judge_persists_.shtml
"And Greer, vilified by many religious protesters, is a church regular. He also is a conservative Republican in a state whose conservative Republican governor tried to overturn one of Greer's orders.
"George is the religious right," said lawyer David Kurland, a longtime friend."
Absolutely. And I would say that even if no laws were broken, that there remains both here and in the Schiavo case, ethical issues that states must address.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1379016/posts <-- Posts 1436+
Evidence? None that would please you.
There was a massive amount of evidence in the Terri Schiavo case. Doctor after doctor. Report after report. Evaluation after evaluation. Ruling after ruling.
Not good enough for you. You insisted on one more test. One MRI. One PET. One more doctor. One more evaluation. One more (de novo) trial.
There is no such thing as evidence that will satisfy you. I won't waste my time.
If the lady is not comatose or in a vegative state why doesn't she just tell them what she wants ?
My living will doesn't have any specific instructions like they say hers has.
Well I have nothing positive to say about any of those judges that carried out this killing - Dems and Rebs alike they are all scum to me.
It doesn't seem to matter. The people who are vigilant are just ignored and the ones who want to kill so&so get their way.
Well the nephew *is* a spokesman for a Democrat congressman...or at least there is a guy in the same town (birmingham AL) with the same name who is... but regardless, perhaps the guy has seen the light of what is going on.
That would make sense.... in a sick twisted sort of way.
"George is the religious right," said lawyer David Kurland, a longtime friend."
Is the Saint Petersburg Times a conservative publication? Or should I regard their use of the 'conservative' label to be comparable to that of the newsmedia's appellation of 'conservative Rep. Gary Condit'?
So rather than show some evidence and then impugn my character for questioning it, you think it better to impugn my character as justification for not having to show anything?
FYI, although one definition for "plausible" is "likely", in common usage the term's meaning falls somewhere between "conceivable" and "likely". More notably, although a hypothesis could not be considered "likely" without supporting evidence, all that is necessary for a hypothesis may be considered "plausible" is that it be consistent with known evidence; specific evidence in support is not necessary.
Returning to the original issue, though, is there any evidence whatsoever that this woman is PVS? Even if you think the standards of evidence I would have employed in the Terri case were unreasonable, I hope you don't think it unreasonable to require at least something.
I guess you can take it anyway you want. The quote, however, was attributed to a long time friend of Greer's. In another article earlier, I did read that Greer considers himself a conservative Christian. Again, I doubt if you could attribute a pro-death descriptor to all of the 40 plus judges in this case. If Greer complied with Florida law as he claims, then he is by definition a constructionist or conservative judge. If he felt the laws were bad, and so ruled, wouldn't he then be classified as activist?
I've known of a number of people who call themselves "conservatives", and whose allies call them "conservative", who are barely--if at all--to the right of Charles Schumer. If someone calls themself my friend, does that make them so?
In another article earlier, I did read that Greer considers himself a conservative Christian.
I'm sure Castro, Mugabe, or Hussein would probably describe themselves in glowing terms also.
Again, I doubt if you could attribute a pro-death descriptor to all of the 40 plus judges in this case. If Greer complied with Florida law as he claims, then he is by definition a constructionist or conservative judge. If he felt the laws were bad, and so ruled, wouldn't he then be classified as activist?
Greer acted in many cases with what could, at best, be described as wanton disregard for whether his 'findings of fact' corresponded with reality. As such, I find it difficult to say he 'followed the law'.
As a hypothetical, suppose that someone appeared before Judge Greer with a 'will' written on a cocktail napkin, supposedly by a recently-deceased relative, which gave all the person's assets to the person presenting it. Numerous handwriting experts found that the writing on the 'will' looked nothing like the relative's writing but a lot like that of the named 'heir'. One handwriting 'expert' said that the 'will' was written with the same color blue ink as the decedent sometimes used.
Under such circumstances, would it be legal for Judge Greer to award the decedent's entire estate to the 'heir' named on the cocktail-napkin 'will'?
Frankly, I don't care. If he says he is conservative, I accept that. If it makes folks here at FR feel better to deny Greer that, then fine. Conservative, after all, seems to be a rather subjective term. I think I am conservative, but I am nothing like the nutcases that have come out of the woodwork here these past few weeks, and I'm sure they would all consider themselves conservative.
Under such circumstances, would it be legal for Judge Greer to award the decedent's entire estate to the 'heir' named on the cocktail-napkin 'will'?
I wouldn't think so, but then I don't know if your hypothetical is really hypothetical, if that is the entire sum of the information available, and what the pertinent laws of the State of Florida are concerning such areas.
Apparently the judge has ordered that three doctors examine her. She could be in a coma. She could be in a PVS. She has a feeding tube. She's not conscious.
If Florida laws are typical, they would basically be that if the cocktail-napkin "will" was indeed written by the decedent, the property division stated thereon is legal. If the cocktail-napkin "will" was written by someone else, it isn't.
So returning to the hypothetical scenario, if the "will" were one that most people would regard as an obvious fake, but Greer accepts the word of one 'expert' who proclaims it genuine, would it be legal for Greer to award the decedent's property on that basis?
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.