Posted on 06/22/2005 8:06:02 PM PDT by Tumbleweed_Connection
"Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last?" asked Joseph Welch in his famous confrontation with the pathologically cruel Joe McCarthy. "Have you left no sense of decency?"
More than a half-century later, I would ask the same question of Florida's governor, Jeb Bush.
In an abuse of power that has been widely denounced, and has even appalled many of his own supporters in the Republican Party, Governor Bush has tried to keep the Terri Schiavo circus alive by sending state prosecutors on a witch hunt against her husband, Michael.
The state attorney who has been pushed by the governor into pursuing this case told me yesterday he has seen nothing to indicate that a crime was committed. Nevertheless, the inquiry continues.
Governor Bush asked Bernie McCabe, the state attorney for Pinellas County, to "take a fresh look" at this already exhaustively investigated case to determine, among other things, whether Michael Schiavo had perhaps waited too long to call for help after discovering that his wife had collapsed early one morning 15 years ago.
Mr. McCabe did not seem particularly enthusiastic about his mission. "I wouldn't call it an investigation," he told me in a telephone conversation. The word "investigation," he said, "is a term of art in my business."
He then explained: "When I conduct an investigation, it would mean that I have a criminal predicate. In other words, that I have some indication that a crime has occurred. That's my job...
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
You make it sound like she made some definitive on the record statement about being in a PVS state. I recall the only alleged indications about her wanting to be killed were vague references to being on total life support from her husband and people in his sphere of influence.
On the other hand there were many people who knew her claiming she made statements about wanting to be kept alive , enough that I am inclined to believe them more then her husband.
Who an objective observer would believe seems to be irrelevant to the court, which again and again and again applied a "let the husband decide, and will all others shut up please" standard to the issue.
It means nothing anymore in terms of fundamental morality what a court rules.
Judges have become, in truth, jack booted thugs ready to beat down the weak, the poor, the humble, on behalf of the strong, the rich, and the powerful.
(To digress from the discussion which is still supposed to center on the question of whether or not the New York Times is consciously, or simply unconsciously, an agent for evil in the real world).
Why do run after a murder? Is one planned, or did one happen -- in your own life?
I'm not a laywer, but from what I've read about this case, the conclusion that there was clear and convincing evidence was reached by Judge Greer and became a finding of fact. From what I read, findings of fact are not reviewed by apellate courts so this key ruling was never challenged by the appeals courts.
"You don't have to automatically throw it back at me."
You may not want to make yourself such an easy target by attacking a fellow FReeper with dubious "facts" then.
Provide the quotes and the links if you would.
It's sad some of the responses I've gotten. I wasn't even arguing to put the tube back in, just let her mother wet her lips.
Like I said man, he zinged me so I zinged him back. It's not that serious; I'm just having some fun with this guy. Why are you calling my facts "dubious" when you haven't even heard them all yet? This is the kind of thing that gets mildly annoying on FR and it happens constantly. I suppose that's par for the course in anonymous forums like this. People are much more contentious here than in everyday life.
Incorrect. Florida did not and does not require a written living will. See In re Guardianship of Browning, Florida State Supreme Court, 1990.
Lets accept your premise that "no evidence exists". Then it is OK that a woman be killed at the request of a husband based on the his unconfirmed impression she would have wanted it.
May I be so outrageous to suggest that a duly elected Representative governing body be afforded the opportunity to inquire as to whether this is good policy?
Perhaps, even in the light of no evidence, we might find other reasons to end unworthy lives like Terri's. Perhaps if someone was once a good Christian who would have never wanted to be a witch (they may very well deny their a witch after becoming one, but what do you expect a witch to say) perhaps we should kill them withouth any evidence as well...just to make sure we respect their wishes and all.
I am not implying anything. The water was stopped by court order. What exactly are you having trouble understanding?
I don't have time to dig up all the links to threads on FR, because there are tons of them on this subject. But I found the tape of Hannity's interview with the Schindlers' lawyer and I will transcribe some of it in the next few days. Transcription is a slow process because people talk much faster than I can type and I have to keep rewinding the tape on a Walkman.
You can repeat that until you are blue in the face, and it won't change the fact that the court ruled that there was clear and convincing evidence that it was Terri's will not to be kept alive under those circumstances. And that this ruling was upheld at every level of the state and federal judiciary.
Thank your for dispelling a misconception I had. I was under the impression that the Legislature determined what the law was, and the courts just applied it to specific cases...but that must not be right, or that would make your citing a court ruling rather irrelevant. I'm just a dumb old conservative, not able to see legal Penubras and all.
Are you chanting that over and over? Where is your heart and who is your god?
We are not governed by your opinions concerning fundamental morality. We are governed by the rule of law, enacted by legislators and interpreted by courts.
Judges have become, in truth, jack booted thugs ready to beat down the weak, the poor, the humble, on behalf of the strong, the rich, and the powerful.
The judges followed the law. You apparently want activist judges -- so long as their activism suits you.
(To digress from the discussion which is still supposed to center on the question of whether or not the New York Times is consciously, or simply unconsciously, an agent for evil in the real world).
Only in your alternative reality was this the topic of discussion.
Please restate in clear and comprehensible English.
In freaking credible.
The Florida 2nd District Court of Appeals explicitly stated that it affirmed the judgment of the trial court.
Further, Greer could have been overruled had any court decided that his ruling was an abuse of discretion. The case was appealed to every level of the state and federal judiciary, and was upheld every time. No court saw any abuse of discretion. In fact, the Florida 2nd District noted that the trial court went above and beyond what they had requested, by reviewing its earlier decision, and holding "another extensive hearing at which many highly qualified physicians testified".
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.