On your homepage you made this statement:
"I do approve of and have vetted in the bible as best I can, the procedure of passive euthanasia or withholding of life saving care in terminaly comatose or dying family members. I believe this compassionate and in line with human morality."
The problem may come in your belief in "human morality." Our morality is not from us, but directed by God. We make some pretty poor decisions and left to our own devices, succumb to all kinds of folly.
In Terri's case she is not living on machines and is not a vegetable. There are extrememly troubling matters with her "husband" and his role acting as her "guardian" that need to be answered. Why be in such a hurry to "pull the plug" so to speak? After all, the only "evidence" that Terri once said she wanted not be kept alive is HIS word...AFTER 7 years in the courts.
When the people who are calling for Terri's immediate death (worse than a dog's lot) are the same ones who will demand mercy for the re-offending sex predator who murdered that little girl - one must ask ... Am I on the right side?
Asking Terri to be a witness is, (in my mind) brilliant. She will perhaps finally be heard. Let's let the truth shine in like the morning sun and justice pour down like a river.
Sorry, but that is really distorted logic.
I did not and have never called for her death,but have defended the process that came to the conclusions that see had expressed her desire to not be kept in this condition.
I am sickened by the interference of the Fed into a issue litigated fairly and extremely thoroughly.
I suspect, that the district court is not likely to take this up. If that happens, the republican party will be guilty of using this situation for political gain and compounding the wrongness of it.