Here is my take on the after effects.
First, the majority of americans agree with the decision. Therefore I don't think on the grand scale this will mean anything long term and there will not be any new legislation with regards to this case.
Second, most lawmakers who voted against the bill live in predominantly democratic areas and elections are over 1 year away.
The poisonous peons on DU are convincing themselves that Terri's death will cause conservatives to join them in hating Bush (both GW and Jeb!). I predict Bush will express heart-felt grief and sincere condolences which will endear him all-the-more to all those wishing her feeding tube was not removed.
The polls will show otherwise, but let's not forget the polls also predicted he would not be re-elected.
If Terri dies, Jeb doesn't have a snowballs chance in hell at the POTUS.
His half-assed effort already alienated those that were unlikely to vote for him in the first place, and for the rest of us that are witnessing this court-sanctioned murder, he is seen as weak for not going the distance.
Sadly, most will roll over and go back to sleep. As more of these happen they will become numb to them and just roll with it.
One day, it will be them facing this. Then, and only then, will they open their eyes and realize how wrong they were today.
as far as God taking Terri home, that's incorrect. This is nothing more than man sending her off to a horrific death. God has nothing to do with it.
And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to [his] purpose. Romans 8:28.
What I would like to se is a debate on Bio-ethics and Euthanasia in general.
Since much of the debate is going on within the "green" and university/intellectual communities, relatively few conservatives have commented on it, other than in the abortion part of the debate. There are large segments of the green left that would embrace euthinasia on a massive scale. Some consider it ethically proper to withhold treatment for the elderly and handicapped children as a waste of resources in an overpopulated world. These same people would withhold care and health advancements to "primitive" peoples while, at the same time, insuring that their lives remain "primitive".
Genetically modified crops are opposed for a number of reasons, one of them being that many of the "greens" view starvation aas a means of limiting world popularions. These are the same folks that piss and moan about our over consumption and who push for a world tax. If there has ever been a strategy for neverending war and chaos, their's is it.
WOW...I started a thread and it has taken on a life of its own.
I knew I could count on my fellow Freepers. Your opinions are appreciated!
Minimal fallout.
Nobody in Congress will pay any price, for being on either side of the issue. Most Americans think that Congress did wrong in involving itself. Any residual rage will dissipate as election time rolls around (November, 2006).
I think the GOP will get good gains in the Senate in '06 if they are smart and on the ball. That will have nothing to do with Terri. In fact, anyone who overstates Terri will alienate more people than win over.