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.
"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."
You do realize that in the years they've had assisted suicide, very, very few people have chosen it -- maybe 25 per year on average? One of the predictions when it was enacted was either that people would stampede to kill themselves or doctors would do it for them. Neither has happened.
Faced with a looming shortage of disposal sites for low level radioactive waste in 31 States, Congress enacted the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985, which, among other things, imposes upon States, either alone or in "regional compacts" with other States, the obligation to provide for the disposal of waste generated within their borders, and contains three provisions setting forth "incentives" to States to comply with that obligation. The first set of incentives - the monetary incentives - works in three steps: (1) States with disposal sites are authorized to impose a surcharge on radioactive waste received from other States; (2) the Secretary of Energy collects a portion of this surcharge and places it in an escrow account; and (3) States achieving a series of milestones in developing sites receive portions of this fund. The second set of incentives - the access incentives - authorizes sited States and regional compacts gradually to increase the cost of access to their sites, and then to deny access altogether, to waste generated in States that do not meet federal deadlines. The so-called third "incentive" - the take-title provision - specifies that a State or regional compact that fails to provide for the disposal of all internally generated waste by a particular date must, upon the request of the waste's generator or owner, take title to and possession of the waste and become liable for all damages suffered by the generator or owner as a result of the State's failure to promptly take possession. Petitioners, New York State and two of its counties, filed this suit against the United States, seeking a declaratory judgment that, inter alia, the three incentives provisions are inconsistent with the Tenth Amendment - which declares that "powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States" - and with the Guarantee Clause of Article IV, 4 - which directs the United States to "guarantee to every State . . . a Republican Form of Government." The District Court dismissed the complaint, and the Court of Appeals affirmed.
This isn't about the Federal government "owning" you. It's about protecting the fundamental right to life, which Western civilizations have largely done for centuries, even up to the 20th century. You don't understand that because your philosophy is as revolutionary as that of the Left.
Good point! liberals are thining themselves out at both the beginning and the end of life... look for the country to get more conservative, which is the only bright side I can see to this mess.
Yea, but is a 5-4 loss better than a 6-3 loss?
I can recite all the Bill of Rights. A lovely piece of work by the way.
"not just a Christian, but a snakefondling fundamentalist evangelical nutball Christian."
I was going to ask which denomination. Forget THAT, if that's the cost of admission. :-[
It was about a Federal government mandate having to do with disposal of radioactive waste.
http://www.justia.us/us/505/144/case.html
pages 163 through about 189 are a quite detailed description of government structure and powers.
This decision was the basis of the Lopez decision and will end up being quoted for the next two hundred years, if we make it that long!
I have a great deal of respect for O'Connor. She is a brilliant jurist and understands law and history very much.
Yes, I know.
My point was that even the Oregon statute would not shield Kervorkian from prosecution for his serial murders.
Hmmm, that argument is familiar. The NOW gang uses that to support abortion. Is Free Republic now ultra-libertarian and/or feminist now?
The difference is that the NOW gang steadfastly refuses to acknowledge that there are two human bodies involved in an abortion, not just one.
If someone wants to kill themselves, it's gonna happen.
Just as with seat belts, guns, etc - it ain't the law - it's the PERSON using it.
Take responsibility for your own spiritual and physical well-being and minimize medical and governmental intervention in your personal affairs. That's my advice.
"I think Roberts knew he needed to side with Thomas and Scalia no matter what. ;)"
You're saying that someone with impeccable background and credentials would not decide based on the law, but on being in the right club? Astonishing.
The right to privacy that facilitates murder of innocents happened -the DUmmies on the left are hypocrites... Cheering for euthanasia and abortion while fighting for free love with AIDS infected partners...
As long as you don't get it mixed up with the DoI...
The actual translation of the Hebrew is "thou shalt not murder," not "thou shalt not kill." Big difference there.
"God help us, because it's obvious we need more Godly judges."
This is a really fantastic idea. We could use the fundamental Muslim countries as a blueprint for how to set this up since they already require this. But would these judges need to believe in the Bible? New testament? Lot of things to consider.
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.