Posted on 11/19/2007 1:08:36 PM PST by Tlaloc
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- Fred Thompson set forth a more clear picture of his views on assisted suicide and euthanasia in a Sunday interview on ABC News. He said he would have supported Terri Schiavo's parents in their efforts to prevent their daughter's euthanasia death and he said courts should err on the side of life. Thompson said the motives behind the actions Terri's former husband took to subject her to a 13-day starvation and dehydration death were "suspect" and he said he would have backed the Schindlers' efforts to save her life.
"From what I know about the facts, or recall about it, I would side with the parents in, you know, keeping that child alive," Thompson said.
"Based on the notion that I can't imagine a parent or a spouse or a doctor deciding anything -- if there's any question that this person might live," he added.
His comments are a more pro-life presentation of his end-of-life views and could help him regain his footing with pro-life voters upset by earlier statements.
In an interview with "This Week with George Stephanopoulos," the former Tennessee senator said that both courts and families should seek the protection of human life if there is any chance a patient might live.
Thompson said courts should only come into play if families can't come to an agreement about the care of a patient who can't make their own medical decisions.
"People have a right to make the laws in their own state to resolve these issues if families can't get together," he said. "If doctors and families can't stand at that bedside and make a decision, which, as I say, I hope would be always in favor of life if there is a chance for life -- if there is a chance for life. And if that can't be resolved, then it should go to the state court mechanism."
Thompson, an attorney and well-known actor, restated his opposition to a bill in Congress to allow the Schindler family to take their case to federal courts.
But, he said he supported actions in the state legislature to make sure that patients like Terri receive food and water as well as appropriate medical care.
"If the families can't get together, the first recourse needs to be the state government," he said.
"Congress took an extra step, said, 'We want you to have a federal hearing also.' The federal court, as I recall, came to the same conclusion the state court did. The point is, it is a family matter -- ought to be a family matter," he added.
Now was that so hard to say, Fred?
ping
This Hunter supporter is liking Fred more and more.
Ping
me to!
He said what I needed to hear. But, in the middle of that, Stephanopoulos said, “She was brain dead!” which is untrue, and all Fred could say was, “I didn’t know that at the time.”
Ouch. She was not brain dead and Steffie got clean away with his bald-faced lie.
Well, at least Fred pointed out that Terri wasn’t dying, but was expected to live a good while yet.
Again, it was what I needed to hear. Next time it comes up, I hope he’s better briefed.
Evidently, Schiavo’s starvation, flag burning and other items deserve laws to prevent but not preserving LIFE in the first place.
I’ll probably never understand why the oh-so-compassionate “liberals” wanted this woman killed so badly.
No kidding. I wonder who whispered that in his ear. That is ridiculous that it took this long for him to think of this.
Sticking with that “Fred supports abortion because he doesn’t support a Constitutional amendment” argument?
I hear you, if he keeps talking like this, my wavering of who to back will be over.
Probably to pre-condition us for the euthanasia that comes with a socialist system.
this was about preserving life...not sure what you mean
Better than his first two answers. IF this was another candidate, they fact that there were two previous answers might raise an eyebrow, but let’s not talk about that.
The only thing I have issue with is this: “He said he would have supported Terri Schiavo’s parents in their efforts to prevent their daughter’s euthanasia death”
I actually DID support her parents and brother. And I’m a nobody. What prevented Fred from doing so?
He consistantly said he didn’t favor a federal law allowing appeal to a federal court (which I disagree with — the federal courts have always been available in capital cases, and any case regarding putting a human being to death is a capital case).
He said he supported state laws that favored life over death when there was any question.
He's had every oppportunity to disavow the need for constitutional amendments that he has previously backed yet now finds the pro-life amendment "unnecessary" and "best left up to the individual states."
With that logic, why not leave the issue of flag burning "up to the individual states."
Ping...
Fredipedia: The Definitive Fred Thompson Reference
WARNING: If you wish to join, be aware that this ping list is EXTREMELY active.
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.