Using your definition of due process, what’s to prevent some tinpot local elected probate judge from treating YOU like property and ordering your torture death-by-dehydration?
Do you think your rights are superior to Terri Schindler Schiavo’s? Why are your’s unalienable, and hers were not?
Do you think your rights are superior to Terri Schindler Schiavo’s? Why are your’s unalienable, and hers were not?
I don't think my rights are superior, but my medical condition is certainly superior to what hers was. It's a silly argument.
And if you read my post you will notice that I disagreed with the decision in the Schiavo case, but I respect the rule of law. I also feel that if someone feels strongly enough about something, as you apparently do, then they should have the courage of their convictions and take extra legal action to try to affect the outcome. Then, of course, you must be willing to accept the consequences of your actions or be labeld a coward (or a terrorist if you're extreme enough).
I don't feel that certain of my own understanding of the situation to take such action in the Schiavo case. I can imagine circumstances that may not have been apparent to me where it was the right decision, so I couldn't see taking action. I have participated in such "extra legal" actions, namely protests that could have resulted in my being arrested, on several issues, including civil rights when I was a child, Vietnam war protests in my adolescence (I wanted a Green Beret war, go in train our friends, give them weapons, provide support but don't make it our war) and abortion protests more recently. I was prepared to suffer those consequences in those cases.