And neither should the national government be either. But hey, that's just an old Federalist view of the powers of the separate and sovereign states. Let's just throw that out and listen to a faux conservative like Krauthammer.
Krauthammer is a faux Conservative? Then Peggy Noonan, Mark Steyn, Fred Barnes, Tom DeLay, Jeb Bush, President Bush, etc. must be "faux" as well. Which leaves, who exactly, to be the "real" Conservatives? Noonan btw way, was Conservative enough for President Reagan...
"Let's just throw that out and listen to a faux conservative like Krauthammer."
No, it means that since Michael was no longer living with Terri--and in fact had a "de facto" marital relationship with another woman, her parents should naturally have had the final say. Marriages come and go, but parenthood lasts for ever. Keep in mind, too, that it is possible for a spouse to have nefarious intent towards another spouse, but unthinkable for a parent to have nefarious intent towards a child. IMHO if parents are still alive, THEY should be the final arbiters of a disabled childs health matters, NOT the spouse.
The NATIONAL Constitution guarantees me life not to be taken from me without due process of law. Death row murderers have access to federal courts before they are put to death, under that 14th Amendment. Any NATIONAL involvement was based on an effort to fulfill that right, and you better believe I as an American citizen want my NATIONAL government to afford me that right under the NATIONAL Constitution. May God protect me from the likes of Judge Greer and all other judges who rubber stamped his work to deprive this woman of her right to live.
How do you feel about the "right to life....."?
Or is that only for non-disabled, non-bedridden, non-speaking "productive" citizens.