Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: jwalsh07
you don't understand the 5th Amendment (clue: it is not about the rights of prisoners, it is about the rights of persons

The Amendment deals mainly with the rights of prisoners and those under suspicion of a crime. However to float your little boat

nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law

she received due process through her guardian. She could have been represented by a state appointed lawyer and the outcome would have been the same

I suspect, however, if the State orders your death, you will be screaming to the high heavens for your Constitutional rights and federal review.

No sir, I would not. I would appeal only to the state Supreme Court and that's it. And if you think that is false bravado, I assure you to the depth of my soul I mean that. Federalist #45 is clear and I will not allow my life, or death, to add to the destruction of federalism that Republicans are looking to continue. You want to use my lifeless body for one of your crusades think again.

267 posted on 06/21/2005 10:30:17 AM PDT by billbears (Deo Vindice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 239 | View Replies ]


To: billbears
The Amendment deals mainly with the rights of prisoners and those under suspicion of a crime. However to float your little boat.

More cognitive dissonance from the "true conservatives". The 5th Amendment is about the rights of persosn. There is no distinction between criminal and civil cases. The rights oultined in the 5th apply to all, despite your opinion to the contrary.

she received due process through her guardian.

The 2nd DCA of Florida stated that Michael Schiavo had an apparent conflict of interest. An apparent conflict of interest under the Florida codes disallows that person from being guardian which is why the 2nd DCA stated that the decision to order the death of Terri Schiavo was not MS's but the courts, the actor for the state. Understand? Do you understand anything regarding the laws of Florida, the TS case or the Constitution?

She could have been represented by a state appointed lawyer and the outcome would have been the same

Due process in "capital cases", cases where the death of a citizen is involved is and should be revieable at the federal level. That you don't understand that the constitution is the main prong of the three pronged Supreme Law of the Land ain't my problem.

No sir, I would not. I would appeal only to the state Supreme Court and that's it. And if you think that is false bravado, I assure you to the depth of my soul I mean that. Federalist #45 is clear and I will not allow my life, or death, to add to the destruction of federalism that Republicans are looking to continue.

LOL. You mean to sit there and tell me that if a State orders your death, you will not avail yourself of your constitutional rights to prove that you are a federalist? You do know that the original federalists were not state powers guys right?

You want to use my lifeless body for one of your crusades think again.

Oh, woe is me said the last true conservative. What you do with your lifeless body is of no concern to me, it's what you and those like you do with your lifeless brains while alive that ticks me off.

362 posted on 06/21/2005 3:05:23 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 267 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson