Posted on 03/22/2005 6:13:43 AM PST by sonsofliberty2000
per Fox
Sorry I will never, as you say come to grips, with the idea of a husband killing his wife under the protection of the courts.
Do you realize that this ENTIRE case hinges on the flimsy issue of her husband's word that she would want to be killed, with no witnesses, no corroboration, and in fact testimony to the very opposite by her family and the rest of the people in her life. Are you comfortable with that?
Thanks. I needed that. Hugs right back at you.
A new court can be created, maybe with some actual honest judges for once that will uphold the Constitution instead of overturning in favor of international law.
Yes, I've pointed this out to some skeptical FReepers. Congress can reign in the courts if they want to. Hell, I've even cited US history and specifically point it out in the US Constitution.
Your post is completely ridiculous, the sanctity of his marriage went out the window when he shacked up with anther woman and fathered illegitimate children.
You know what, I really do not give a phuck about this one doctor.
He is irrelevant to my opinion on this case anyway.
I don't think a court can be abolished unless a sitting judge retires because the Constitution says that judicial salaries cannot be decreased.
Well, he agrees with my analysis of Whittemore's ruling. He also knows the 11th Cir is the most conservative of the Federal Appellate Courts. He is providing some cover for when they correct Whittemore's ruling, hoepfully later today.
Just damn!
What you are not doing is tossing out the law, and doing what you want, regardless of outcome.
"And now in FL you'll be able to take your worthless spouse (ill, maimed, brain damaged) to a hospice and get rid of it just like a pet you don't want anymore. The only difference is they will put your pet "to sleep" with drugs (the same ones they use to do away with murderers) and your spouse will have to starve to death."
Child of God...
We pray those judicial sinners...
Do not cause the hour of thy death...
Amen !!!
.
He's out of office in 2006 anyway.
Michael Schiavo needs to be in Criminal Court.
JEB , please in Jesus Christ name, ARREST Michael
for ADULTERY & PREJURY charges ASAP. GET the DCF & STATE TROOPERS to get TERRI TO HOSPITAL ASAP!!!!!
Save the Nation, and OBEY GOD LAWS NOW!!!
On a another front,please GET U.S. ATTY GENERAL ALBERTO GONZALEZ and DEMAND TO investigate this CASE, this is a CRIMINAL CASE from DAY #1(RE-CHECK FACTS) here's his email:
AskDOJ@usdoj.gov
GET THE FBI:
http://www.fbi.gov/contactus.htm
JEB, Get the Florida Senate BACK in session(Work) ASAP!!!
I haven't seen the text that shows Gibbs arguement....but I do know he brought up Terri being Catholic and her religous rights.
But I don't think any of it matters. No matter what he brought up would have been rejected. He was told to go write a brief on why the new law is constitutional.
"After a determination of the merits of a suit brought under this Act, the District Court shall issue such declaratory and injunctive relief as may be necessary to protect the rights of Theresa Marie Schiavo under the Constitution and laws of the United States relating to the withholding or withdrawal of food, fluids, or medical treatment necessary to sustain her life.
It seems to me that Congress is giving the Court the leeway to determine the merits of the suit. And I suspect that it couldn't be otherwise. Congress cannot simply order a Court to issue a particular ruling.
Issues of morality cannot be discussed with atheists which this poster said he was, because they all believe that everything around them is just due to luck therefore there are no standards or guiding principles.
the only place I know where adultry is a crime is in the UCMJ and in the Bible. The first has not jurisdiction, the second will come at a later date.
You are one of those people who think that people unjustly convicted of crimes should stay in prison because due process was followed, aren't you?
Since when is a single state judge considered to be the state en totale? The State of Florida made its wishes known through legislation, but the judiciary struck it down as an impermmissable usurpation of the judiciary's power. The State of Florida didn't like the ruling based on the current law that Greer had made. So they changed the law. The judiciary said no. Where does that follow with state's rights and the Constitution? It doesn't.
As far as her husband is concerned, the nurses who worked with Terri on a daily basis have made sworn statements telling of his great desire that she recieve NO therapy. He did not try to enforce her 'wishes' until many years after the event which led to this, until after the lawsuits had been decided in his favor. You may wish to be willfully blind, but most of us here chose not to be. The husband has no credibility. Terri's friends and nieghbors have stated the exact opposite of what her husband and his kin maintain.
As far as the rest of your argument... a very wise man once said the law is an ass. If we allow a woman to be starved/dehydrated to death just because a law/judge says we can, then we have become no better than the Third Reich or Stalin's Soviet Union. You may be fine with it. I sure as hell am not.
In the 1950's, the federal and state processes and systems failed to protect the rights of blacks under the 14th Amendment. Two entities stepped in with drastic action. One was the USSCt, which produced the Brown v. Board of Education decision. Despite its praiseworthy result, most of the legal scholars I trust see this decision as the real beginning of the judicial coup. The second drastic action was of course the National Guard forcing the schoolhouse doors in Mississipi. I think we both want the same result here, but you have much more faith in the system and processes than I do right now. As such, I am willing to support more radical action by either the executive or (highly unlikely) the high Court in this case.
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.