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 ...
I am kind of impressed that he actually answered a tough question.
It was PURE politics. It was a strip tease for the base....period.
Not in Florida, you can't.
Smart man.
"I think it's probably best to leave these kinds of matters in the hands of the courts
Ummmmm, if the federal government has three branches: the executive, legislative, and judicial....how is leaving it up to the judicial branch keeping government out? Why is it ok to have one part of government get involved but not the others if they are all equal branches?
SO who should have decided?
Well, the federal Constitution does contain the Fifth and the Fourteenth Amendments, which protects folks from being killed by their government without conviction for a capital crime. Or at least it once did. When Jeb Bush refused to act, his brother had a duty to step in and enforce the Bill of Rights.
What part of "promote the general Welfare" means NOT protecting the citizens of the USA? I don't mean give them entitlements, I mean the basics, like LIFE.
Murdering your citizens doesn't give you small government, it gives you a small population, and a place in hell. Well deserved, I might add.
What exactly did congress do? Give her access to the courts? That is not infringing on another branch of government. They(congress) can do whatever they damn well please as long as it doesn't interfere with another branch of government. They are supposed to pass whatever laws they want.
4 anyone's guess :')
That's it for him. Next!
I knew what you meant. ;^)
don't hide, your post is correct - semantics aside. the reaction by Congress was "out of scope", but it was precipitated by an unyielding approach to the case by the entire judiciary, from the lowest court in florida all the way to the top. that was the big problem I had with the case - the conduct of the judiciary.
The right to life is the preeminent God-given, unalienable right. Its protection is at the very heart of the Bill of Rights in the Fifth Amendment. It also happens to be spelled out in the Florida constitution, as it is in every state constitution, in Article One, Section Two of that document.
No, I'm not. I've actually *read* the Constitution and the rights that belong to each of America's citizens. I'm not talking about entitlements. LIFE is not an entitlement.
They interfered with states rights. And yes congress can pass any law that want to. If they pass a lwa that says everyone must wear their underwear on their head every second Tuesday of the month, and the president signs it, they can do it. But that does not maker it RIGHT or SMART!
Me too.
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.