SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS OREGON'S SUICIDE LAW

ap ^

[GarySpFc]

The court finally shows some sense, no thanks to Roberts, Scalia and Thomas. The Big Stupid Government does not own us, and this ruling is a small recognition of that fact.

You need to walk back over to your Democratic Underground boards.

[mosquitobite]

I'm saying with how politicized the court is now, and how many social conservatives (even on this thread), what do you think would have been the reaction had Roberts sided with the majority on this?

[Sols]

Not only does the United States Constition not protect any fundamental right to life, it doesn't even mention one. Moreover, I have the right to my own life. The government does not have the right to my life. It does have the right to ensure that the steps that I take in the excercising of my rights are legal, just, and fair to all parties, which is what Oregon's law does.

Your are saying the government knows better than me when I should die. I disagree.

[antiRepublicrat]

Recent Supreme Court opinions can be found at:

Thanks, I checked earlier, but it must have just been posted.

Skimming over it I see the following:

Opinion: Ashcroft was an opponent of assisted suicide, so when he became AG he arbitrarily, and without consulting others he was supposed to (including the state), and without regard to the state's ability to regulate medicine within its borders, interpreted the rule to exclude assisted suicide as a medical action. His interpretation was out of the bounds of his authority under that law.

Dissent: We should always defer to the decisions of federal officials, and goes into playing with dictionary definitions of "medicine" and "prescription," trying to redefine "prescription."

[little jeremiah]

Just because some states would permit it doesn't mean it's actually constitutional.

But at least many states could and no doubt would outlaw the killing of the unborn.

[Hank Rearden]

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 want Big Stupid Government to force some kind of "right to life" on someone who wants to relinquish that right and die? You want to keep them in pain, or immobile, or helpless when all they want is relief from that?

"You have a right to life, subject, and we will ensure that no matter what you want. Now just sit there and stop moaning."

[eyespysomething]

Welcome to FR. While it is fun to jump right in a heated discussion and disagreement on a thread, please note that as a new person, as of today, you will probably get flamed.

[Borges]

Oh OK you were being sarcastic. My apologies.

[linda_22003]

I didn't realize it was a popularity contest. But surely people know by now that justices have a way of being quite independent once they are on the high court.

[TeenagedConservative]

I don't disagree with euthanasia in general (people should be able to remove themselves from society), but the states should decide this, not the Feds.

[Pirate21]

Conservative and Christian here, but if I'm terminally ill and suffering and want to die, I don't want someone legislating that I must stay alive and suffer. Sounds as though we'd better write euthanasia wishes into our advance directives. Perhaps that would be a way to address this and keep it out of the legal system. If someone helps another die as per that other's written and notarized wishes, then they shouldn't be held liable. To prevent out-and-out murder, require such written wishes.

[Pyro7480]

The way that your framing the argument is pure libertarian BS.

[Fishtalk]

in the years they've had assisted suicide, very, very few people have chosen it

They were all waiting for this Supreme Court ruling today.

I can see an entirely new profession springing forth. Say I'm not smart enough to be a doctor. Say we have a two year study in learning assisted suicide. How hard can it be? Learn how to insert a needle?

Could be big money here in the new "Suicide Assistant" positions for the dumber among us.

Sheesh. Get the gun, pull the trigger, and keep the government out of it.

[DBeers]

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.

Soon you will be astonished. After Alito -just one more to go...

[conservative physics]

By your arguement since the constitution doesn't SPECIFICALLY mention a right to life.... a state can decide to round up and excute every black person in it for just being black .... and the federal government is helpless to stop it.

[mvpel]

The fundamental right to life stems from the fundamental principle of self-ownership.

Self-ownership encompasses one's own decisions on the continuance of one's own life.

As someone else pointed out, this ruling is not about the right to life, it's about the right to determine how one's own life will end.

[mosquitobite]

Since you couldn't tell sarcasm from my first post (with the wink) and then chose not to answer my question on the reaction, it was nice meeting you. Good day! :)

[Westlander]

There are VERY few hospices that accept pt's on ventilators. Blowing thru 500K in a month is nothing. And you can throw in the other vehicles driver and passengers on top of that. If you choose not to wear a seatbelt, you should wave your rights for medical care. I have no desire to pay your bills thru my insurance costs. You made that decision, not me. That's the hole in my state's nofault mandatory auto insurance law.