More name calling from a so-called religious person.
This was not your decision to make. It was her husbands decision and was backed by many many years of litigation. I do not support his decision, but it was his to make unless it could be proven in a court of law that he was not a proper guardian.
Actually I'm not particularly religious and disagree with the religious right on a whole bunch of issues. Just not this one.
But it's a telltale sign of a leftist to throw out the "religious" angle when they can't make a rational argument.
And your deficiencies in that area are clear by your claim that it's her "husband's decision." Even the most strident and hysterical death cultists understand that the law says that it's the patient's decision. The husband here is simply the mouthpiece for her decision. In this case he happened to lie and get a lawless judge to believe him and a manifest injustice was done, though leftists obviously don't see it that way.
Would've been nice if Greer allowed the guardianship case to move forward instead of sitting on it since Nov. 2002. No contempt of court for Michael for not showing up at court-ordered depositions at least twice. Court-recorders there, but no Michael. Why did he never get in trouble? Why wouldn't Greer let the pleading move forward?
No need to answer me. I already know why.