Posted on 03/11/2007 7:40:49 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
TAMPA -- He's campaigning hard for support from Republican social conservatives, but presidential candidate Mitt Romney said Saturday he disagreed with the government's intervention in the Terri Schiavo case.
"I think it's probably best to leave these kinds of matters in the hands of the courts," Romney said in a television interview airing today.
(Excerpt) Read more at orlandosentinel.com ...
"And we (myself included) did not follow through on our obligation, and Terri died as a direct result. My excuse is that I live in Oklahoma, not Florida, but that is all it is. We should have stopped that unlawful execution, by force of arms if necessary."
Don't go too far down that path friend. It isn't your job in this case.
There is a possibility that there was "nobody home" in that body though I'm inclined to always err on the side of life.
I agree that it was a death sentence handed down by a court decision. The proper legal remedy for judicial error is a pardon. A pardon could be backed up by force via executive order if necessary.
Many people hanker after an older, simpler time when you killed off troublesome relatives ~ "......just toss grandpa to the Polar bear..." ~ and had your selection of judges who'd rule your way.
In your opinion, does any person who holds that there are moral absolutes which may not be compromised, and defends that position, earn the title "self righteous"?
At one time, people who wanted to have ventilators or feeding tubes removed would go to the trouble of writing a living will or leaving written, specific power of attorney for someone else to make that decision. The spouse did not automatically get to make the decision. People who didn't bother to write that living will or power of attorney were left to live in that state whether they wanted it or not. While there are drawbacks to that way of doing things, keeping that policy would have prevented the whole mess in this case.
We need three reforms to deal with these cases.
1. Settlement money for a patient in a coma or any similar state must be left as a trust to be used only for medical care and never to pay lawyers except to execute living wills or previous, written, witnessed instructions. The settlement money should never go to a survivor.
2. A judge's "finding" of someone's medical condition is always subject to review. Higher courts may not hide behind a "Judge so-and-so already issued a finding" excuse. Higher courts must be willing to examine the medical evidence and hear fresh medical testimony.
3. Family members may file for divorce on behalf of a patient in a coma or similar state if there are grounds. A husband living with another woman as if he were her husband would be grounds for this divorce as it would be if the patient were not in a coma or similar state.
In some cases, these very same reforms would lead to a family having someone removed from nutrition and hydration, and I can accept that outcome. I don't want the government making these decisions, but I do want the government ensuring that the right people make these decisions. Once he had gone on to live with another woman, Michael Schiavo wasn't the right person to make these decisions. Even if he was completely sincere and truly believed he was acting in Terri's best interest, he should have recused himself once he had entered another relationship.
Bill
Me too.
Me Three!
It is EVERY "Humans and Governments" responsibility to make sure that NO ONE is starved to death in this day and age!
Don't complicate this matter. It is SIMPLE - - - - "they" STARVED Teri to Death!
ping...
Actually, she was dehydrated to death. :*(
Equally horrific.
While you were away *ping*. A most illuminating thread.
I keep an open mind about Romney. I will be interested to see if this issue blows up in his face. At the very least, it was a blunder for him to bring it up. Not smart at all.
I followed the threads everyday and well, zealots and Terribots are quite acceptable terms applied here, IMO.
That's NOT true. EV still has many friends on this board.
"EV is incapable of saying a nice word about ANYONE."
That too is not true. He has publicly said nice things to me.
But I have yet to see him post a single, positive thing about ANY of the candidates. THAT is true.
How ironic can a post get on FR?
We surely agree there. : )
Mitt may as well get this topic out in the open.
If 'you' want a different result, change the effin law.
That's all he's saying. Don't go looking for an activist judge to fit your moral absolutes.
You are technically correct. Regardless . . . . . . we treat sick cows and horses; wildlife , snail darters - - - you name it - - - better than the (final) treatment she got.
Thank you.
It's not. This is a civilized place that supports civilized debate among civilized ladies and gentlemen.
Some Libertarians are allowed in provided they behave themselves.
That isn't even close to what actually happened. Mitt's wrong about the Terri Schindler case.
Give me a decent candidate, and that will change. :-)
Your welcome. : )
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.