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

Skip to comments.

SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS OREGON'S SUICIDE LAW
ap ^

Posted on 01/17/2006 7:07:26 AM PST by SoFloFreeper

BREAKING ON THE AP WIRE:

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court has upheld Oregon's one-of-a-kind physician-assisted suicide law, rejecting a Bush administration attempt to punish doctors who help terminally ill patients die.


TOPICS: Breaking News; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; US: Oregon
KEYWORDS: 10thamend; americantaliban; assistedsuicide; badjudges; blackrobedthugs; chilling; clintonjudges; clintonlegacy; cultureofdeath; cultureofdisrespect; deathcult; deportthecourt; doctorswhokill; firstdonoharm; gooddecision; goodnightgrandma; hippocraticoath; hitlerwouldbeproud; homocide; hungryheirs; hungryhungryheirs; individualrights; judicialrestraint; mylifenotyours; nazimedicine; ruling; scotus; slipperyslope; statesrights
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,041-1,0601,061-1,0801,081-1,1001,101-1,117 last
To: Beelzebubba
You might have a point if the federal government passed the Controlled Substances Act in 1970 in response to Oregon's assisted suicide laws.

They didn't. So you don't.

1,101 posted on 01/21/2006 8:23:14 AM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1100 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
robertpaulsen hypes:

I'm sure these "doctors" can find another way to kill their patients. They're smart.

Get a grip paulsen. -- Doctors in Oregon are not allowed to "kill their patients".
They are allowed to assist in suicide, not murder.

Whatever. This is Oregon's issue. If the citizens of Oregon wish to allow suicide in their state, that's their decision.

Thanks for conceding the main point of the article, upheld by the USSC.

Just don't use federally controlled substances, that's all.

Back you go, - in circles. The narcotics used are the best substances available.

In this issue, feds are trying to control suicide, not 'substances'. -- And they are not empowered to control either one..

The "main point" of the article was federal objection to the misuse of controlled substances,

Weird. - The article is about "SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS OREGON'S SUICIDE LAW"

not federal objection to Oregon's suicide laws.

The AG objected, the USSC slapped them down.

Thank you for not letting me down by missing the point altogether.

Thank you for once again displaying your 'control agenda'.

1,102 posted on 01/21/2006 8:46:04 AM PST by don asmussen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1099 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen; Beelzebubba
robertpaulsen:

If the citizens of Oregon wish to allow suicide in their state, that's their decision. Just don't use federally controlled substances, that's all.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


That sounds like you wish to wield federal power merely to be an annoyance, and to achieve no meaningful end.
1,100 Beelzebubba


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


The Controlled Substances Act of 1970 had a very socialistic 'meaningful end'..
It tries to establish that Congress can control virtually anything by using it's commerce clause power.

This idea is being rejected, much to the discomfort & annoyance of the paulsens of our nation.
1,103 posted on 01/21/2006 9:03:19 AM PST by don asmussen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1101 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen

Me: "Do you really believe that this is the objection of the Justice Department?"

You: "I believe this is their stated objection."

-------

That hardly answers the question. Do you believe the Feds always tell the truth?

Do *you* really believe that this is about the use of regulated substances?


1,104 posted on 01/21/2006 9:05:09 AM PST by highball ("I find that the harder I work, the more luck I seem to have." -- Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1092 | View Replies]

To: highball

The federal government didn't involve itself with other methods of suicide.


1,105 posted on 01/21/2006 9:46:48 AM PST by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1104 | View Replies]

To: highball
The decision is consistent with their drug policy. Allowing drugs to be used in a manner inconsistent with their stated policy would open the door to comments from people like you demanding to know why an exception is being made for suicide drugs but not for harmless marijuana.

Nothing worse than being called a hypocrite, right?

1,106 posted on 01/21/2006 9:47:02 AM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1104 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
Allowing drugs to be used in a manner inconsistent with their stated policy would open the door to comments from people like you demanding to know why an exception is being made for suicide drugs but not for harmless marijuana.

They're transparent.

1,107 posted on 01/21/2006 9:51:06 AM PST by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1106 | View Replies]

To: Mojave

You see that with their posts regarding the government's discontinued IND marijuana program -- they let the test subjects continue their marijuana use and the dopers call the government a hypocrite.


1,108 posted on 01/21/2006 9:59:57 AM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1107 | View Replies]

To: djf
Sounds like Kervorkian is a free man...

No, he's not necessarily. It's a states' rights issue. Kevorkian isn't in Oregon is he?

It's hypocritical to demand the demise of Roe vs Wade due to "states' rights" on one hand and then whine because the Supreme Court upheld Oregon's right to make a similar such decision, on the other.

1,109 posted on 01/21/2006 6:58:39 PM PST by madison10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen; Mojave
Bump for transparent hypocrites.
1,110 posted on 01/22/2006 5:23:31 AM PST by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1106 | View Replies]

To: tpaine; Mojave
Well, looky here. His very first post under his old moniker consists of nothing more than a personal attack.

And you wonder why you're banned.

1,111 posted on 01/22/2006 6:57:05 AM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1110 | View Replies]

To: Mojave; robertpaulsen
Nothing worse than being called a hypocrite, right?
1,106 robertpaulsen

They're transparent.
1,107 mojave

Bump for transparent hypocrites.
1,110 tpaine

Paulsen, hypocritically:
Well, looky here. His very first post under his old moniker consists of nothing more than a personal attack.

How pitiful that you consider using your own comments a 'personal attack'.

And you wonder why you're banned.

Banned no more massa - free at last!

1,112 posted on 01/22/2006 8:30:47 AM PST by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1107 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen

Same old Chester.


1,113 posted on 01/22/2006 8:32:33 AM PST by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1111 | View Replies]

To: Mojave; Roscoe; Cultural Jihad; Kevin Curry; Mojo; DonMorgan; yall
Same old roscoe.

Lots of the the old gang seems to be reinstated.. Was it a general New Years Amnesty?

1,114 posted on 01/22/2006 9:08:50 AM PST by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1113 | View Replies]

To: epow; trisham
I'm not a physician, but I believe the Hippocratic oath includes the following vow [...]

Neither am I a physician, but why is the Hippocratic oath relevant? The old Hippocratic oath is rarely taken by doctors these days, and the modern version does NOT include the prohibition any more than it prohibits charging tuition for medical training. How many people are protesting the medical schools?

1,115 posted on 01/24/2006 5:29:36 AM PST by Gondring (I'll give up my right to die when hell freezes over my dead body!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 863 | View Replies]

To: Almondjoy; ohioWfan; highball; bvw; Dr. Nobel Dynamite; EternalVigilance; Howlin; TKDietz; ...
Since we are so ready to force people not to make a choice to go to hell.. should we make sure that anyone who joins the military believes in Jesus as well? Should we force our soliders to Christianity? Are we sending people to war where they can die in light of them not being Christians? Is that not the same thing?

And heck, why stop with soldiers? Since this issue has to do with citizens of Oregon, why not say that all citizens of Oregon must be Christian? After all, their lives are God's, their free will means nothing, God wants them to be Christian, they don't own their own lives, etc.... </sarc>

God wanted us to have free will.. Man wants to take it away.

Funny how those who most strongly want to take it away are those who claim to be closest to Him. Seems like there are some verses in the Bible that warn us about such people. And I'm wondering if the continual attempt to confuse this suicide issue with mercy killings is actually intentional, and therefore a bit of intentionally bearing false witness.

1,116 posted on 01/24/2006 5:42:07 AM PST by Gondring (I'll give up my right to die when hell freezes over my dead body!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 986 | View Replies]

To: Gondring
Funny how those who most strongly want to take (the free will granted by God) away are those who claim to be closest to Him.

It most certainly is.

Very telling.

1,117 posted on 01/24/2006 8:08:34 AM PST by highball ("I find that the harder I work, the more luck I seem to have." -- Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1116 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,041-1,0601,061-1,0801,081-1,1001,101-1,117 last

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.

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