Don't Delay, Tom. Stop corrupt judges from robbing and killing innocent Americans.
Posted on 04/09/2005 3:48:54 PM PDT by FairOpinion
Top conservative leaders gathered here a week after Terri Schiavo's death to plot a course of action against the nation's courts, but much of their anger was directed at leading Republicans, exposing an emerging crack between the party's leadership and core supporters on the right.
And yesterday they issued an ''action plan" to take their crusade for control of the nation's courts well beyond Senate debates over judicial nominees, pressing Congress to impeach judges and defund courts they consider ''activist" and to limit the jurisdiction of federal courts over some sensitive social matters -- a strategy opposed by many leading Senate Republicans.
''This is not a Democrat- Republican issue; it is a liberal-conservative issue," Rick Scarborough, a Baptist minister and chair of the Judeo-Christian Council for Constitutional Restoration, sponsor of the gathering, said in an interview. ''It's about a temporal versus eternal value system. We are not going away."
In the charged battle over the future of the nation's courts, conservatives so far are outgunned financially. Last week, liberal groups mounted a multimillion-dollar advertising campaign designed to build support for the filibuster and thwart Senate confirmation of nominees they consider extremists who will pursue a ''radical agenda and favor corporate interests over our interests," as one MoveOn.org radio advertisement intoned.
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
"Maybe not on the surface, but ultimately it comes down to this question."
No it doesnt.
If her wishes were as clear to Terri's own parents as you apparently think, there would have been no court case because her parents would not have fought for her life as they did.
They have stated throughout that Terri didn't want to die prematurely like this.
"Everybody knows that this was a euthanasia case, no ifs and s or buts."
This is not an opinion, but a fact: It is a FACT that Judge Greer and Michael Schiavo made the decision to kill Terri Schiavo.
That is called euthanasia, to make such a decision on behalf of someone else.
Terri was no longer in the state to make that call.
"That would be a horrible thing."
Yes, it *was* a horrible thing.
" I would tend to think a person would rather want to be liberated from such a prison of a living death."
YUP. Spoken like a non-disabled person who'd maybe be a bit scary to some disabled folks fearing EUTHANASIA... you have just *presumed* that she would want death and have 'made the decision for her'. "Life" is not a 'living death'. Life is life.
=====
I guess you are leaving it to a judge to decide when you should die and how brutally or not.
Here you are with a terminal illness, and you didn't make a living will and yet you are willing to believe the outrageour claims, that a healthy woman in her early twenties, with not a care in the world, would give instructions to her husband, that she would wnat to be starved to death, claims, which only her husband and his family remember, curiously, seven years AFTER she collapsed, and AFTER her husband collected a huge malpractice award, specifically given to care for Terri based on her lifeexpectance of some 50 years at the time.
"I would propose that territory, land, is no longer the basis of the modern State."
where is my Nixonian list...?
>Please tell us all here in FLA specifically, (in details,) how the Governor should have pulled this off?
He could have issued an executive order requiring all non-terminal patients not be denied food and water in absence of written directive.
He could have called out the national guard to uphold state laws. (Something he has as an ORDINARY power)
He could have called a state of emergency, which it was due to a constitutional crisis, which suspends the judges orders.
He had more options than he is willing to admit to..
>>Also, which State laws are you referring to??
Florida State Constitution, Article I Section II. Go google it..Right to life, which can't be denied because of disability. The judge had no authority to trump this section of the Constitution, or any other section for that matter. It was Jeb's responsibilty to uphold he constitution and he failed.
"They certainly were around. What wasn't around was the notion that they could be used to justify killing people."
Thank you.
I really did not know if they were around back then. I do know what their primary purpose was though.
Harsh, but probably appropriate.
For a woman who wanted to die she held on to life to the bitter end.
Women confide personal information regarding their inner most thoughts to their female friends a lot.
In some cases much more so then their husbands, especially if they are considering divorce.
Why then was the testimony of Terri's best female friend not allowed?
That friend's affidavit stated that Terri would not have wanted to die even in a coma (which she was not in) and that Terri actually stated herself after watching the Karen Q movie, "Where there's life, there's hope".
Greer did not allow the friend's testimony.
How did Micheal's relatives know better than Terri's female friend and why did their testimony have more leverage with Greer??
How many people do you know who actually tell their in-laws more than their best friends?
I have a severe problem with Greer's "fact" finding because it defies basic logic.
I agree with you that the question is if Terri wanted to live as she was. The problem is a lot of people are letting their personal thoughts on how they would view living in Terri's state get in their way.
Terri ping! If anyone would like to be added to or removed from my Terri ping list, please let me know by FReepmail!
Compromise in NY= backdeals with the RINO Gov. while elected officials, with an R after their name, let it happen.
As I said, NY is just like the rest of the country, overwhelmingly conservative, with pockets of areas (i.e., like NY City -- Long Island has been taken over by liberals, so has Ithaca, which is like Berzerkely, which CONTROL the rest of the state's interests, but doesn't align itself with the rest of the state's interest.
The nation is the same way. Apparently, you've forgotten all about the red/blue map with the counties showing how many counties voted conservative. Dreaming most of the country is not conservative doesn't make that a reality.
OK.
We begin with the allegation that Terri was in "PVS." This diagnosis, in general terms, is controversial; but in the specific case, those MD's who made that determination did so without the extensive testing which protocol demands. Further, the designation was applied to a woman who had had the benefit of ZERO therapy at the express order of her legal husband. As you know, many MD's were surprised to learn that there were no PET or MRI scans which supported the "PVS" diagnosis.
Secondly, in a case like Terri's, nutrition and hydration are simply not considered "extraordinary" or "burdensome." There are cases where feeding/hydration are fruitless, and even contra-indicated, such as when other bodily functions are shutting down (kidney failure, e.g.) in what is viewed as a classical 'shutting-down' sequence. The fact that tube-feeding is a recent addition to medical care is irrelevant. By the way, since Terri was able to swallow her own saliva without difficulty, there is some reason to believe that therapeutic treatment would have been effective in 'weaning' her from the tube.
Then there is the question of "utility," which has been phrased as "Would YOU want to live under these.....for the next XX years?"
This question really is a conflation which is mis-applied. The first part of the conflation is, perhaps, easily verified. YOU might not want to live under such circumstances. However, the second part contains an implied projection: that is, would you, based on your answer, apply the same rule to Terri? The answer given is "yes," but that answer is irrelevant and immaterial, because neither you nor anyone else can "speak" on behalf of someone to effect their suicide (or murder, as I would characterize it.)
This last goes to the moral question. It has long been a fixture of Judaeo-Christian moral theology that only the Author of life has the authority (not a pun--) to end that life, or those lives. In the case at hand, the State, through legal constructs, some of which are certainly shaky, has arrogated to itself such authority.
This brings us to the presumptive nature of the State. Under the Constitution, the State (whether Federal or State) is established for the benefit of 'life, liberty, and the pursuit...' All of the State's apparatus and actions which flow from this initial charge are legitimate; all that contradict this charge are, per se, illegitimate, (excepting the cases of criminal conviction for certain specified and narrowly limited actions.)
We most likely agree that many of the State's functions and apparatus are not related to protection/promotion of 'life, liberty...'--but in the Terri case, the State's apparatus and actions were directly contradictory to the presumptive charge--the raison d'etre.
These are the general principles on which I base my argument that Terri was murdered by the State, in collusion with her "legal" husband. For Greer, in the end, acts as an instrument of the State, and he should have seen to Justice by adhering to the State's first duties.
Happy?
I expect that GWB will be more forceful on the judiciary issue over time. Jeb, OTOH, is toast.
They will also be well-advised to carefully review Federal standards regarding the 'diagnosis' of "PVS."
And make damn sure that States do the same.
"PVS" seems to have mission creep--but if you look at the MD's who define it for purposes of legislation, you'll understand why....
Of course, in a larger sense, God knew exactly what would happen with Terri. It's entirely possible that this evil occurred so that good will come of it.
It sure woke a lot of people from sleep...
Don't Delay, Tom. Stop corrupt judges from robbing and killing innocent Americans.
No compromise = no budget. Unfortunately for a majority of the people in this state, that is a negative. For the Gov. and enough R representatives who are in tossup districts who have voters who read propaganda filled papers, that means they must compromise or else they don't get elected. You blame the pols -- I blame the voters.
As I said, NY is just like the rest of the country, overwhelmingly conservative, with pockets of areas (i.e., like NY City -- Long Island has been taken over by liberals, so has Ithaca, which is like Berzerkely, which CONTROL the rest of the state's interests, but doesn't align itself with the rest of the state's interest.
As I said Binghamton, Syrucuse, Albany, Buffalo, the Lake Champlain area (even Rochester), they all vote liberal. Westchester is even more liberal than Long Island and L.I. is a majority liberal or at least they vote that way. The people of Long Island are liberal enough and gullible enough that when Newsday starts publishing stories about the budget not being passed, enough people listen to it, believe it and become unhappy. The only real populated area in NYS that votes conservative is Staten Island. What you call pockets is where most people live.
The nation is the same way. Apparently, you've forgotten all about the red/blue map with the counties showing how many counties voted conservative.
As I said, a majority of the country voted for Gore and Nadar in 2000. The distribution of liberals into populated counties vs. less populated countries doesn't make what I said less true. Do you understand that? It is illogical to think that it does. It is a non-sequitur to imply that I've forgotten about the red/blue map.
Dreaming most of the country is not conservative doesn't make that a reality.
To conclude from anything that I said that I have a wish for this country to be nonconservative shows your judgment to be -- poor!
Imply such again and I will demonstrate your poor judgment again.
Browning was 82 or so, stroke victim. She did have a written advance directive. The patient was not PVS and was not terminal. Florida court system held that starving these patients to death is legal. Note the decision dates to 1990, before the Florida statute was changed so that the definition of "life-prolonging procedure" was expanded to specifically include "artificially provided sustenance and hydration."Supreme Court of Florida.
In re GUARDIANSHIP OF Estelle M. BROWNING. STATE of Florida, Petitioner, v. Doris F. HERBERT, etc., Respondent.
No. 74174.
Sept. 13, 1990.
BARKETT, Justice.
We have for review In re Guardianship of Browning, 543 So.2d 258 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989), in which the district court certified the following question as one of great public importance:
Whether the guardian of a patient who is incompetent but not in a permanent vegetative state and who suffers from an incurable, but not terminal condition, may exercise the patient's right of self-determination to forego sustenance provided artificially by a nasogastric tube?
Id. at 274. [FN1] We answer the question in the affirmative as qualified in this opinion.
FN1. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. Estelle Browning died on July 16, 1989, at the age of 89. Although the claim is moot, we accept jurisdiction because the issue raised is of great public importance and likely to recur. In re T.W., 551 So.2d 1186, 1189 (Fla.1989); Holly v. Auld, 450 So.2d 217, 218 n. 1 (Fla.1984).
I. THE FACTS
On November 19, 1985, a competent Estelle Browning executed a declaration that provides, in part:
If at any time I should have a terminal condition and if my attending physician has determined that there can be no recovery from such condition and that my death is imminent, I direct that life-prolonging procedures be withheld or withdrawn when the application of such procedures would serve only to prolong artificially the process of dying.
In addition, Mrs. Browning stipulated that she desired not to have "nutrition and hydration (food and water) provided by gastric tube or intravenously." [FN2]
FN2. The entire form is reproduced in the appendix of the district court's opinion. In re Guardianship of Browning, 543 So.2d 258, 275 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989).
At eighty-six years of age, Mrs. Browning suffered a stroke.
...
The consensus of the medical evidence indicated that the brain damage caused by the hemorrhage was major and permanent and that there was virtually no chance of recovery. Death would occur within seven to ten days were the nasogastric feeding tube removed. However, Mrs. Browning's life could have been prolonged up to one year as long as she was maintained on the feeding tube and assuming the absence of infection.
Chapter 765, Florida Statutes 2004 <-- 765.101(10)
Note also the recitiations in Browning's living will. These were construed by the Florida District Court of Appeals in such a way as to find that Browning was legally terminal. That a scheduled natural death by dehydration, under the fact circumstances of the case, was what Browning wanted, and was therefore legal.
This is also the case that lays the groundwork for the assertion that Michael somehow did the blood family a favor, by following the "more strenuous" legal course before starving Terri to death. The alternative, less strenuous course, is to starve her to death with no permission required from the court.
Oh there is a split alright and it is huge. What Terri showed is that the GOP leadership is nothing but lip service and plays the social conservatives for utter fools. Doing nothing but talk while all the issues social conservatives care about are settled in a "compromise" with Ted Kennedy. LOL.
Never has a political party played it base as ignorant, know nothings, that ain't got no choice as the GOP has played conservatives for the last 5 years. Open borders, Chicom dumping, deficet spending, new entitlements, education, Patriot Act, out sourcing, etc, etc, etc.
Really, I don't care what you think of my judgment. Let the facts speak for themselves, not spin on biased data collected by liberals with an agenda.
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.