Replies

So then would a USSC Judge be right in upholding a prohibition on suicide? Yes. Why? Because it has been understood that the right to life is a right upon which this nation was built. Anyone can off them self of their own free will. Even the Lord won't stop you as in the case of Judas. Like it or not though the laws of this nation were in fact founded on the Bible and the laws there in as the guide.

And again I'll ask you, cite me the specific clause in the US Constitution that gives the fedearl government the authority to override Oregon's assisted suicide law.

What you are advocating is judicial activism, making decisions based on your view of right and wrong rather than what is written in the law. This is exactly the same kind of logic that justices such as Warren, Berger, and Ginsburg use in their opinions.

Again, I want judges that excercise judicial restraint, are originalist, and who make their decisions based on the letter of the law, not on their own personal views of right and wrong. That is why I voted for George W. Bush.

The nation went to war with the crown over the right of life. The USSC judge you seek does not exist never has never will. All are biased and will rule accordingly. I prefer one who would rule in favor of life based on the same religous principle of the founders. And again I must point out to you suicide is an act of self. Assisted suicide is an act of murder. Again be careful what you ask for.

When such a dreaded act is legalized on any level of government the lives of all free people are then in danger. You would do well to find out just who actually is behind such an insane notion as assisted suicide and why. Again I say currently over two thirds of our federal, state, and local laws are now written for the specific purpose of controlling profit loss for one monetary special interest group namely the insurance companies.

As it stands right now you, I, or the person next door has the ability to end our life of our own act. Yet for some reason you want governemnt to give it's stamp of approval to the act as well? The federal courts would have an interest in preserving life especially when laws support ending life extend beyond the scope of Capitol Punishment. The very fact that this issue must be debated at all shows a deep sickness of our nations people and I'm not talking about a physical one.

I think this is the best answer and I take it from The Constitution Party Platform so it's not my words by rather I'm stating the source "The right to life should not be made dependent upon a vote of a majority of any legislative body." In other words my right to live or die should not be dependent upon the federal, state, or local government. Any of the three wishing to do such would be in violation of my civil rights and as such an interest to the USSC and their duty to defend my life.