SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS OREGON'S SUICIDE LAW

ap ^

[IranIsNext]

The choice about whether to believe God and/or generations of His followers is a personal one. You'll have to make it on your own. I only hope for your sake it is a timely decision

Now I am confused. But I thought the state's job is to decide that for us and then enforce a law based on the belief on everyone in society. There is no choice in that, whether or not you believe in a higher power or not. If a particular point of view is forced upon you soley on the basis of the religion then there really is no choice at all. Nothing changes.

Just look at the Mullahs in Iran. Muhammadism is the law of the land, religious beliefs to the contrary be damned. (literally)Christians in that part of the world suffer because of Sharia being the basis for law. I don't like it when Islamic extremists do it, and I don't like it when groups professing to be defending such and such religion do it either.

[Gelato]

The first thing to go by the wayside is the fear of God, followed by the abandonment of respect for the innocent lives of those who were made in His image. Shortly thereafter, liberty in all its various forms is the final casualty. This is the lesson of history.

So true.

All satanic powers involve grasping for the power of God.

As our nation treads down that road, we cannot claim rights from the God we do not respect.

[IranIsNext]

Smoking is not legal for the PURPOSE of killing people.

Cause and effect. One could argue about that for much harder drugs as well, but imagine if they tried to legalize something like PCP or heroin.

[BykrBayb]

It has to be the wish of a terminally ill person.

Who gets to decide what the patient's wish is? As we saw with Terri Schiavo, it isn't always the patient who decides. A rogue judge can easily decide that a patient wants to commit suicide, even when there is strong evidence against such a ruling.

[EternalVigilance]

Now I am confused.

That much is clear.

[IranIsNext]

If a state can overrule the right to life, it can overrule the right to every expression of liberty, and soon will.

Let me ask you, who do you believe possess that "right to life"? And who's life? You can only have a right to life if it is actually your own, if it belongs to someone else then it is THEIR right to your life, which is hence not a right for an individual at all.

[EternalVigilance]

Your attempt to associate American prolifers and Christians with the mullahs is a contemptible one.

The Islamists have no regard for the right to life and for liberty, whereas Christianity is the source of respect for life and liberty.

[IranIsNext]

All satanic powers involve grasping for the power of God.

As our nation treads down that road, we cannot claim rights from the God we do not respect.

States do that all the time when they tell you have to keep your life whether or not you want to. So it becomes the state's life, and neither the person's or God's life. They become God in a sense, which is quite a scary thing IMHO.

[steve86]

Because how else would they know what pisses God off?

By reading the Bible YOU STUPID MORON

[EternalVigilance]

We all intrinsically know that our lives belong to God. It's self-evident.

Unfortunately, humanists think THEY are god, and the statists think the state is...

[BunnySlippers]

Terri Schiavo did not want to be in a persistent vegetative state.

[red irish]

Speaking from someone who is always in pain and suffers from depression what I might want one day may not be the same as next week. Things like this always start out one way then change and the next thing you know anybody but you is the one making the decision if you should die. Birth control was suppose to make abortions go down?

[Irontank]

this is a matter for the states

Absolutely right...and, sadly Justice Thomas' dissent notes that the scope of federal power under the Controlled Substances Act is "sweeping and troubling" (i.e. an unconstitutional infringement on an area that belongs with the states) but that is "water over the dam now"

Thomas' opinion is the most illuminating again as he notes (with some obvious bemusement) that most of the same Justices holding that assisted is a matter for the states held, just 7 months ago in the Raich case, that the federal government had the authority to criminalize purely intrastate medical marijuana...

[muawiyah]

If you'll notice, Oregon passed their statute in 1994. It's 12 years later and no other state has done so.

Remember, if Algore had been President when 9/11 happened, he'd still be negotiating the size of the conference table with the Taliban and Oregon would be a black, smoking pit.

Hey, isn't that what Oregon is anyway?

I do hope Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg, Stevens and her little friend retire there soon.

[Gelato]

Cause and effect.

Heck, one could argue that everything, in one way or another, leads to our death. Death is the inevitable result of birth. The second we take our first breath, it's downhill from there. ;-)

Back to the point. The "Death with Dignity" law of Oregon has one purpose, and it's not a side-effect: death for an innocent person. Death codified in the law. Death regulated by the state.

It's simply wrong and dangerous to open that door.

[EternalVigilance]

Terri Schiavo did not want to be in a persistent vegetative state.

She whispered that in your ear, I'm sure...

[BykrBayb]

Tell that to Terri Schivo.

Can't. She "decided" she wanted to be tortured to death.

[muawiyah]

When the outcome of a judicial decision is that an innocent person will die, it is the wrong decision every single time.

[AuH2ORepublican]

""The authority desired by the government is inconsistent with the design of the statute in other fundamental respects. The attorney general does not have the sole delegated authority under the (law)," Kennedy wrote for himself, retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor and Justices John Paul Stevens, David Souter, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Stephen Breyer. Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia dissented."

---

It sounds like the case was decided not on the grounds that Congress lacks constitutional authority under the Commerce Clause to ban the use of regulated drugs in assisted suicide, but on the grounds that the federal law does not delegate to the Attorney General the power to decide what is a proper use of federally regulated drugs. Does anyone know exactly what the Court said?

[Gelato]

States do that all the time when they tell you have to keep your life whether or not you want to.

Actually, the position of every state is that such questions belong to God. All states recognize God's authority in their constitutions, and do not suppose the power to determine your life for you.