I'll grant you one incompetant or corrupt judge. Heck, I'll toss in a couple more to keep it honest! But that still leaves 19 other judges -- are you saying that that many judges would look the other way? Are you saying that the entire judicial branch of our government is that out of whack? And if so, what does that say for the state of our republic?
The incident that caused me to cross over to the conservative side of the coin was one that was tied to the changing of rules in mid-stream, simply because those in power didn't "win." The Atlanta School Board tossed out a blind bid simply because a large Jewish-owned business won the bid, and awarded the contract to a smaller, minority-owned firm. Simply because that firm didn't win in the first place.
Legally, this is no different. Laws were changed in mid-stream in order to try to upset the apple cart. The checks and balances that the founding fathers put in place were circumvented (or at least an attempt was made in that direction).
This is not a dictatorship. Ironically, those who compare this to Nazi Germany would rather have a Hitlerian hand from the Governor's office or the Oval Office reach in and take charge by decree.
The legal checks and balances worked. But if the government steps in now, the institution of marriage is for naught. After all, if you didn't like the man your daughter married (or the woman your son married for that matter), you would be able to get the rules changed by the government if you think his decision-making is wrong. Is that what we want?
The damage would be as deep as the notion of gay marriage that many of those who are upset here oppose.
This is not a situation that can be decided over a beer at the corner bar. It is far, far deeper than that.
Man, that comment shows a lack of understanding of the legal principles involved in this case. I understand why though, the media is awash with misleading Q&A, polls; and much of the discussion takes a priori, as fact, that the law automatically gives a spouse the right to deny medical care that would kill his better half.
Well, one thing that colors my view of the integrity of the Florida courts is the 2000 election in which the highest court of that state blatantly disregarded legitmate state law in an attempt to get a desired result.
Terri's case was sent to the Fed courts on Monday. If they were serious about starting from scratch as directed by Congress, or even doing a honest review, Terri's feeding tube would have been re-inserted then, while the matter was reviewed.
This is pro-forma, get rid of the girl and clear the bed.
Legally, this is no different.
Sure it is. In this case a life is trying to be saved, not government largess.
There is such a thing as unjust laws and they must be attacked and often the courts are the best place to do it. There is, however, such a thing as bad judgements which also must be attacked and a legislature is not an inappropriate place to do it.