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 ... 241-260261-280281-300 ... 1,101-1,117 next last
Comment #261 Removed by Moderator

To: HapaxLegamenon
In other words they allow people to kill themselves with controlled substances. Does this mean that someone wanting to kill themselves can get around federal gun laws, if a gun and not an injection is the method of choice.

You mean if they were somehow federally prohibited from owning a weapon? First, I disagree with that one too. But this is a case of doctors who have the legal ability to dispense medications doing it. The actions of doctors are governed by the state; and therefore it is a state matter. The feds tried unsuccessfully to use the drug laws to invade state sovereignty.

262 posted on 01/17/2006 8:48:50 AM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Brightside
I wonder if the same rationale will be used in abortion cases.

The Court has already ruled that assisted suicide is not a constitutionally-protected right. So no, the rationale wouldn't be the same because the question isn't the same.

263 posted on 01/17/2006 8:49:24 AM PST by Sandy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Borges
The protections you mention are in the DOI not the Constitution. Therefore they have no legal standing.

Okay. I'm sure the good judges would do it much better. There must be a way to weasle something to that effect in there. Those words in the DOI certainly set the scene that this country is based on a Culture of LIFE.

Anything involving implementing death just shouldn't be in the legislature.

It's my story and I'm sticking to it.

264 posted on 01/17/2006 8:49:45 AM PST by Fishtalk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 258 | View Replies]

To: mvpel

Another nail in the coffin of seatbelt mandates, seems to me



No, this would serve only to establish that it is permissible for a state not to criminalize the lack of a seatbelt.

If the decision had mandated that all states legalize assisted suicide, then you would have a point.


265 posted on 01/17/2006 8:51:33 AM PST by Atlas Sneezed (Your FRiendly FReeper Patent Attorney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies]

To: Justanobody

Ping to post #201.


266 posted on 01/17/2006 8:51:42 AM PST by La Enchiladita (Taking a stand and speaking up imperil one's health, but friends false and true are thereby known.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

The day will come when democrats will regret they pushed for this.

Few conservatives would choose suicide. While those liberals in Eugene and Portland will likely thin their herd, thus thinning their non-reproducing voting block.

Look for Oregon to be a solid red state by 2012.


267 posted on 01/17/2006 8:52:11 AM PST by proudpapa (of three.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: greasepaint
this is a matter for the states
As it should be, as abortion should be and was until Roe v. Wade.
268 posted on 01/17/2006 8:52:24 AM PST by Quicksilver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Fishtalk; SoFloFreeper; Raycpa

Are you guys pulling my chain? Can so many people on a website dedicated to the United States and its government not understand the difference between the Declaration of Independance and the Constitution, and recognize which one is actually the basis of our entire government and which one is just a big "piss off" to the King?


269 posted on 01/17/2006 8:52:37 AM PST by Sols
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 254 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat

You know, a better way to force all of us to drive safer and thus reduce injuries in motor vehicles would be a federal law mandating a spear being mounted in the steering wheel pointing at our chest.

I know I'd drive slow and careful then!


270 posted on 01/17/2006 8:52:44 AM PST by eyespysomething (Let's agree to respect each other's views, no matter how wrong yours might be.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 256 | View Replies]

To: Sweetjustusnow
There is that little thing in the Constitution called "the right to life"

Really? Where? Let's see, "life" appears once in the context of treason, twice in the 5th Amendment (due process and double jeopardy), and once in the 14th (due process). None of those contexts apply to this issue.

271 posted on 01/17/2006 8:53:25 AM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 215 | View Replies]

To: cvq3842

I am troubled by assisted suicide, but that's a policy argument.

We have to stick to our principles on the Constitutional arguments.



Exactly. The frothing small-mind folks don't know the difference, and "know" the decision is bad, just because of who decided it.


272 posted on 01/17/2006 8:53:31 AM PST by Atlas Sneezed (Your FRiendly FReeper Patent Attorney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 227 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah

Have you ever read about what goes on in the Netherlands since they started on the path of "compassionate death"?



Oregon has had this law in place, and the procedure in practice, for years. Why don't you tell us the horrors it has brought?


273 posted on 01/17/2006 8:54:45 AM PST by Atlas Sneezed (Your FRiendly FReeper Patent Attorney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 228 | View Replies]

To: vox_freedom
Yeah, like this one (below) on the same issue?

Different case. Also notice it wasn't the federal government attempting to undermine the state law using federal law.

274 posted on 01/17/2006 8:55:03 AM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 216 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480
Roberts passes first "conservative test" as Chief Justice.

And what "conservative test" is that - Federal ownership of our bodies?

This is a good ruling; at most, it's a state issue. Actually, government can butt the hell out - a .357 overrules robed tyrants if a person wants to end their life.

275 posted on 01/17/2006 8:55:04 AM PST by Hank Rearden (Never allow anyone who could only get a government job attempt to tell you how to run your life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

Comment #276 Removed by Moderator

To: djf; All

Does anyone know how many people in Oregon have used this option? Are there a lot of doctors that participate? And am I correct that a coma patient isn't included in the law? Can his/her family decide for that person?

I don't think ANY doctor really "knows" how long a person will live. It's a guess, based on statistics, at best. I would think that if a person is of sound mind when this decision is made, then that person could use their sound mind to carry out their wishes without involving courts or doctors.


277 posted on 01/17/2006 8:56:34 AM PST by Jrabbit (Kaufman County, Texas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 257 | View Replies]

To: conserv13

Well, than you are not Conservative IMO!


278 posted on 01/17/2006 8:56:41 AM PST by Halls (Dallas County, Texas, but my heart is in East Texas!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah
So the states should have the powers to enact laws that violate the basic constitutional protection of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?

I keep looking, but I still can't find that in the Constitution.

279 posted on 01/17/2006 8:56:50 AM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 228 | View Replies]

To: mwilli20; freepatriot32

Just as someone had told me, Thomas' dissent seems solely to point out the hypocrisy of the majority in relation to Raich.

Read it, it is quite funny how he's almost pointing out their stupidity.

LOL


280 posted on 01/17/2006 8:57:00 AM PST by mosquitobite (As the Iraqis stand up, we will stand down.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 253 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 241-260261-280281-300 ... 1,101-1,117 next 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