Replies

There is a big difference between choosing to end your life via "assisted suicide" (right-to-die), which is usually based on knowledge and should be signed and notarized statement, so that persons who actually have a terminal illness with extreme pain can chose to end that pain, the forced to die (euthanasia) which is what is proposed in Terri's case. She does not and never did have the right to choose and bearing in mind her religion would not have chosen to die.
This legal precedent will destroy America's ability to enforce human rights embargoes wherein children are being denied education and forced to work in factories and often under hazardous conditions.
This legal precedent will enable nursing homes to terminate the lives of servicemen who have fought for this country and now find themselves disabled.
This legal precedent will enable spouses to terminate each other legally, even without the consent of their spouse.
This legal precedent will enable persons to terminate their children who become ill with cancer or other disease because it is convenient to do so.
This legal precedent will place America on the rolls of those countries engaged in genocide, no different from some of the tribes of the middle east and Africa who are massacring all the men, women, and children of opposing tribes.
This legal precedent will place America in the same status of WWII Germany.
In this respect Michael is right, this is bigger than Terri, it represents who we are as a nation state. Terri has become a symbol of right and wrong, and could become a martyr (sp)in a nation that has lost its soul and its values. I hope someone leaves their roses on the steps of the capitol for all to see, symbolic of a lost nation that needs to find itself again.