[Former Military Chick]

Charles is one heck of a writer. Whether you agree or disagree he offers food for thought.

[1Peter3v14]

Michael Schaivo's lawyer keeps saying Terri said, "no tubes for me". Well, that doesn't mean to keep food out of her mouth. If her parents want to feed her pudding, jello, etc. and it works, then to deprive her of that is beyond her wishes. The judge is ordering something she never requested. No tubes, not no food!!!

[JennysCool]

The problem is that although your spouse probably knows you best, there is no guarantee that he will not confuse his wishes with yours. Terri's spouse presents complications. He has a girlfriend, and has two kids with her. He clearly wants to marry again. And a living Terri stands in the way.

He WON'T simply divorce her. America, wake the &%$# UP!

[Luddite Patent Counsel]

"What do you do when you have nothing to go on? You try to intuit her will, using loved ones as surrogates."

Wrong. Unless you're the Amazing Kreskin, you don't try to "intuit" anyone's will. When there's a doubt, LIFE wins out.

Period.

End.

Of.

Story.

[Brimack34]

Blood is thicker then water. I believe the family is who you go with. Spouses come and go but your family is always there. Plus he was not married that long. And he wants her dead!

[DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet]

Repulsive because in a case where there is no consensus among the loved ones, one's natural human sympathies suggest giving custody to the party committed to her staying alive and pledging to carry the burden themselves.

One would think so, but I've seen otherwise.

[NonValueAdded]

The general rule of spousal supremacy comes from an age where golden anniversaries were common. Today, people are amazed if a couple makes it to 10 years. Sure, there are plenty of exceptions but the current divorce rate should be factored into the equation when it comes to current day application of that general rule.

[Gimme]

That's a good article!! Thank you for posting it.

[McGavin999]

The only outcome in this case is a complete loss of faith in our "justice" system. First the courts rule that states have no right to determine whether or not someone like Lee Malvo, who just scraped under the wire as a minor when he killed all those people in the sniper attacks, should be terminated for his crimes and then they come along and state the states DO have a right to determine the death of a perfectly innocent person. Judges in MA decide that marriage is fungable and can mean anything they want it to mean even if the people disagree and the "lawmakers" stand frozen. These same black robed thugs decide that the people don't have first amendment rights when it comes to political speech when they upheld CFR, but pornography of course DOES fall under the perview of freedom of speech as does burning the flag. Go figure!

I have come to the conclusion that you must not ever do anything that would bring you to the attention of our courts. NEVER! You must live in total fear of being put at the mercy of these cold hearted, immoral people in black robes. They are to be feared more than anything, they are inconsistant, they are not judges, they are gamesmen playing with words while peoples lives are in the balance.

Don't bother to tell me how much better our system is than any other, frankly I can't see it. It may not be worse, but it is certainly no better. You can not count on it, it's worthless.

[Balata]

"There is no good outcome to this case. Except perhaps if Florida and the other states were to amend their laws and resolve conflicts among loved ones differently -- by granting authority not necessarily to the spouse but to whatever first-degree relative (even if in the minority) chooses life and is committed to support it. Call it Terri's law. It would help prevent our having to choose in the future between travesty and tragedy."

It is difficult to disagree with Charles on this point. Perhaps this will be the best outcome.

[ewin]

We are seeing slow-motion tyranny, where the wheels of government justice grind so slowly to produce a lawful result that is the opposite of justice.

[Slyfox]

And we do not go around euthanizing the minimally conscious in the back wards of mental hospitals on the grounds that their lives are not worth living.

Well, we aren't euthanizing them yet. The Nazi doctors initially began their work on the 'Final Solution' by moving the mentally afflicted out of institutions and into group homes.

From Robert Jay Lifton's book, The Nazi Doctors: Medical Killing and the Psychology of Genocide

[econ_grad]

Can someone please explain this to me? Why is it that the husband is considered the sole guardian in this matter? The parents here want to take custody of their child. Why arent they allowed by the court to do so?

[Eagles6]

He is also "pro-choice". I like the guy and find him insightful. Just hope someone in a black robe doesn't make the choice that life in a wheelchair isn't what he would want.

[Eagles6]

He is also "pro-choice". I like the guy and find him insightful. Just hope someone in a black robe doesn't make the choice that life in a wheelchair isn't what he would want.

[Nick Danger]

The federal judge who refused to reverse the Florida court was certainly true to the law.

But see, the federal judge was not supposed to be asked to review the Florida case. Congress had given the Schindlers an opportunity for a completely new trial on the facts. But their bone-headed attorney filed what amounted to an appeal, citing alleged errors by Greer as the basis of his arguments. He left the federal judge with no choice. He made the one plea that was guaranteed to lose.

Terri Schiavo may well die because the Schindlers' attorney is incompetent.

[nutmeg]

bttt

[LAQueenBee3]

Charles Krauthammer cuts through rhetoric and bring clarity to the argument in defense of Terri's life. Thanks Mr. Krauthammer for the insight.

[Louis Foxwell]

letter to Charles KRAUTHAMMER:

Dear Mr. Krauthammer,
The law has been imposed without mercy. It has further been imposed in direct conflict with the religious beliefs of Terri. For her to want to end her life she would have to reject the teaching of her church, to which she remained devoted throughout her active life.
The court has completely failed to consider the religious ramifications of suicide by refusing basic sustenance as an act that, according to the teachings of the Roman Catholic church, condemns her immortal soul to eternal separation from God. There is no reason to assume that this would ever have been her choice. This leaves us with the likelihood that she is being murdered against her will.
This is a travesty of justice and makes a mockery of the courts. The culture of death has overplayed its hand. The court has sentenced Terri to death on hearsay and a denial of all of her protected rights. The courts have affirmed that she is no more than the property of an uncaring husband who no longer wishes to be burdened with her continued existence.
This is a perilous moment in our nation's history.

[7thson]

And we do not go around euthanizing the minimally conscious in the back wards of mental hospitals on the grounds that their lives are not worth living.

Not yet!

[Right_in_Virginia]

BUMP