If so, that is NOT a state right, because it violates her right to live.
No, this isn't a states rights issue at all.
Your statement of what "you see" is not worth commenting further on.
"The only state right I see is the "right" to allow her husband to order the hospice to stop providing food and water to her. Is that the state right you're referring to?
If so, that is NOT a state right, because it violates her right to live."
Longtime lurker here. Just signed up because I happen to agree with Rep Boehlert, as well as several people on this thread, and wanted to respond. And as far as state's rights are concerned, plenty of states have laws that on these "right-to-die" issues and there has been very little in terms of outrage that I've seen. Texas has a law, The Futile Care Law. It was invoked just last week when Sun Hudson, a six-month-old boy with a fatal congenital disease, died after a Texas hospital, over his mother's objections, withdrew his feeding tube. The child was apparently certain to die, but was conscious. The hospital simply made the decision, and the Texas courts upheld that decision after the mother failed, during the 10-day window provided for by Texas law, to find another institution willing to take the child. Where was Congress last week? Are they now going to have to address each of these agonizing situations across the country??
There are thousands of unbearable tragedies, and unthinkable decisions that ordinary people have to make every day. Since myriad doctors and judges have reviewed the Schiavo case for seven years, and have consistently come up with the same conclusion, I have to honor their decisions and tell the Congress to butt out.
Flame away.