Replies

That's why my post #1 concerned changing the law. No man is above the law. But sometimes, perhaps, we need a new law.

We got a new law, one at the federal level, a new law that the judicial tyrants in this country thumbed their damn noses at. By your logic, we should all have "obeyed the law" and been good liddle colonists in 1776, and bowed the knee to the Crown.

HEY, we could be just like Canada!

IOW, "BZZZZZT", wrong answer.

Does it not seem a bit odd to you that people like Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King are hailed today because they did NOT blindly follow the "law" when that law was unjust? They did not meekly "know their place" and sit quietly until the unjust law was done away with, and fair laws were enacted, but Jeb Bush bows the knee to his judicial master in Pinellas County, and everyone wants to hail him as some kind of hero?

Oh yes, the "Law" trumps all, regardless of the end result. Ask those law abiding Germans about their experience with that from 1932 to 1945...

Does it not seem a bit odd to you that people like Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King are hailed today because they did NOT blindly follow the "law" when that law was unjust? They did not meekly "know their place" and sit quietly until the unjust law was done away with

I think you have a valid point here, but let's continue with it and see where we go in Terri's case.

So, OK, now Gov Jeb Bush sends the National Guard in to take Terri from the hospice or wherever she may have been.

Meanwhile, the courts were recognizing her husband -- not Gov Bush or Jeb or FL -- as having legal custody.

What has just happened?

Well, you are correct that Gov Bush would have been in violation of the court's ruling. That is an offense you want overlooked.

So. OK, we will overlook it.

But, what else has happened?

Well, Gov Bush has now also violated a sacred bond and contract of marriage.

Can you overlook that, too? Would you like to hear what others think of that violatation of God's law? If you are interested in knowing how other conservatioves feel about THAT violation of law, then reread this thread. Many people are AGAINST that violation of God's law by the government.

The difference in the two situations is this: the era of civil rights you evoked had OTHER types of relatioonships at their core: customer/business or ppublic transportation; or students and public schools; or employee and employer. No Rosa Parks or Martin Luther King was marching to violate what is recognized as a sacred contract between two married people.

Terri's case had, at its core, a legal relationship of husband and wife, with a husband having the right of legal guardianship. You would have to find a way to say that relationship was "unjust" before you could go in and take legal custody of Terri. Otherwise, it would be kidnapping in the eyes of the court- and, a violation of God's law.

Again, reread this thread if you don't believe me! :)