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

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 561-580581-600601-620 ... 1,101-1,117 next last
To: Gelato

I think YOU should be on the Supreme Court. :-)

You stated it perfectly, and far better than I could have.

Thank you!


581 posted on 01/17/2006 12:29:21 PM PST by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 577 | View Replies]

To: Sweetjustusnow
The purpose was to establish a government of laws that would protect and secure each person's Creator- endowed rights to life, liberty, and property.

And how can this be if as you state a person's life belongs to the state? Because you have made it very clear that you think a person only has a right to their own life when fundies think it should. A person dying of cancer's right to life is nonexistent, their life is property of the state, essentially. What they do with their life is restricted by only what would be considered "holy" or something or other like that.
582 posted on 01/17/2006 12:29:58 PM PST by IranIsNext
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 516 | View Replies]

To: Graymatter

Sweet, that just means that all the liberals, who find this good and wholesome, will be the ones lining up for the Doctor assisted suicide.

Ensuring that conservatives, who would not consider suicide, increase their percentage of eligible voters.

Liberals... they want to kill off their unborn replacements... and die as soon as possible. No wonder Europe's population is shrinking dramatically.


583 posted on 01/17/2006 12:30:16 PM PST by gogogodzilla (Raaargh! Raaargh! Crush, Stomp!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Nobel Dynamite
Since you didn't answer my question, I'll assume that you agree that no one is being deprived of any constitutional rights in the case of assisted suicide.

Such an assumption would be delusional, and completely in contrast to what I clearly stated.

584 posted on 01/17/2006 12:31:01 PM PST by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 578 | View Replies]

To: tertiary01

"Fine. Unfortunately many here on FR feel that physicians are totally responsible for everything that goes wrong with their patients and demand that our gov. step in to micromanage health care"

Hillary Care in first gear.


585 posted on 01/17/2006 12:31:45 PM PST by IranIsNext
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 519 | View Replies]

To: Gelato

The state wouldn't be killing anyone. This would be the domain of an invidual and his family. The question is does the state have the right to stop them.


586 posted on 01/17/2006 12:32:52 PM PST by Borges
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 577 | View Replies]

To: dljordan

I live in pain constantly and here lately the doctors seemed worried about me taking too much pain medication, that they control. In fact one of the medications they wanted me to try was not a narcotic here in Ky but was in Ohio. And the side effects were just plain awful. They also know how much I hate taking medicine but the pain can be so severe that I can barely stand it. So I guess if I can not take the pain anymore will they give me enough medicine to die with dignity? No I forgot I have to already dying?!


587 posted on 01/17/2006 12:32:57 PM PST by red irish (Gods Children in the womb are to be loved too!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

SOme object to suicide as a matter of moral principle, others object to any nanny.

Why not both?


588 posted on 01/17/2006 12:33:02 PM PST by IranIsNext
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 538 | View Replies]

To: IranIsNext
And how can this be if as you state a person's life belongs to the state? Because you have made it very clear that you think a person only has a right to their own life when fundies think it should. A person dying of cancer's right to life is nonexistent, their life is property of the state, essentially. What they do with their life is restricted by only what would be considered "holy" or something or other like that.

Is that the only way you can debate, is to lie about the stance of your opponents?

No one here claimed that any citizen's life is 'the property of the state'. You made that up.

Our lives belong to God, whether we admit it or not.

589 posted on 01/17/2006 12:33:18 PM PST by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 582 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
The God-given, unalienable right to life is dead in America. The horrors to follow will not be pretty...

Yup. States have no God-given or constitutional right to legalize murder.

590 posted on 01/17/2006 12:33:46 PM PST by Aquinasfan (Isaiah 22:22, Rev 3:7, Mat 16:19)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
If you disagree, then please state why you think anyone is being deprived of a constitutional right in this case. You haven't done so yet.

Because a right exists does not automatically mean the government can mandate that right be exercised.

Why do you think Congress should be given more control over the end of your life than you are?
591 posted on 01/17/2006 12:34:38 PM PST by Dr. Nobel Dynamite
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 584 | View Replies]

To: Borges
The question is does the state have the right to stop them.

And, throughout American history, of course the state has the right to prevent the killing of its citizens.

A rather large 'duh' factor there...

592 posted on 01/17/2006 12:35:15 PM PST by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 586 | View Replies]

To: Petronski
So much for the lock-step Catholic voting block. Kennedy's an asshat.

CINO

593 posted on 01/17/2006 12:35:50 PM PST by Aquinasfan (Isaiah 22:22, Rev 3:7, Mat 16:19)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: floridaobserver

Read post 533.

And just to clarify, I'm not for suicide. I find it to be a coward's way out of life. However, as I understand it, this law requires a patient's approval before he offs himself.


594 posted on 01/17/2006 12:35:54 PM PST by Ultra Sonic 007 (The opposite of Progress is Congress)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 576 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

Let me rephrase and ask if the state has the right to prevent a citizen from taking their own life. Do you think the state chase around the suicidal and restrain them?


595 posted on 01/17/2006 12:36:12 PM PST by Borges
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 592 | View Replies]

To: greasepaint

Now maybe the Court will defer to Referendums in California abd Colorado? What gives here? Oregon's morality is closer to O'Connor's? It has always been among the least religious states, a hive of the KKK for instance.


596 posted on 01/17/2006 12:37:18 PM PST by RobbyS ( CHIRHO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Nobel Dynamite
Please explain to me how the state is killing anyone in an instance of assisted suicide.

Oregon's law sanctions and codifies assisted suicide. The state is therefore complicit in the killing of the innocent via its legislation.

Without the law, the state would punish those doing the assisting, as in the case of Dr. Kevorkian.

597 posted on 01/17/2006 12:37:46 PM PST by Gelato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 580 | View Replies]

To: BearWash
"If I was termanally ill, I would want this option, I dont see why Conservatives are against this. Its your life."

"Four spelling mistakes in one line. A new FR record?"

Wow, he made several grammar mistakes. Now what does that have to do with what we are arguing about again?

"BTW, many conservatives are offended because God is offended."

Looks like some people need to go easy on the shrooms, or at least tell a doctor about the voices in their heads. Because how else would they know what pisses God off? Unless they are claiming to be the Messiah. But isn't that heresy?

Don't worry, God disavowed collective punishment after that rain storm thing. I think. You will be saved, the rest of us however will be going to hell.
598 posted on 01/17/2006 12:38:11 PM PST by IranIsNext
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 532 | View Replies]

To: floridaobserver

"Regarding States Rights, most liberals and conservatives are highly principled.


If the state agrees with their position, they are for States Rights.

If the Federal Government agrees with their position, they are for Federal Rights."

Fair enough. ;-)


599 posted on 01/17/2006 12:39:42 PM PST by IranIsNext
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 556 | View Replies]

To: ohioWfan

Since when has the "right" to life been transformed into a requirement to live?


600 posted on 01/17/2006 12:41:09 PM PST by justshutupandtakeit (Public Enemy #1, the RATmedia.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 231 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 561-580581-600601-620 ... 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