Posted on 05/02/2005 5:06:09 AM PDT by Quaker
Ach, nein, herr boss-man. I am not supporting those judges making rulings killing das "useless eaters".
Circus? What greater bloodsport is there for those who agree with killing an innocent person than to starve her to death? That's your "circus" for you, as in bread and circuses.
It seems we still haven't learned the lessons of the Holocuast and Nuremberg.
Who are you calling crumbs and what do you mean by it?
He should be drawn and quartered. BUT only until the point BEFORE death.
THEN, NO QUARTER GIVEN as his sorry ass is slapped into a bed. AND NO FEEDING TUBES NOR A DROP OF WATER.
Have you ever been to a cockfight?
Anyone who wants to.
Do the legislators even vote on the changes?
No...only the Florida Supreme Court can overturn a citizen inspired Constitutional amendment referendum.
I was talking about the end-of-life panel law revisions - do the legislators vote on these revisions or are the recommendations automatically made law without review by elected legislators? If so, why? Where is the oversight of the panel?
Also, you know that people are not going to be checking monthly about the changes in end-of-life law. So, due to human nature, they have free access to progressively create laws allowing state murder of citizens.
Sometimes, lawyer jokes just write themselves.
ping
The COA did a complete review of the trial courts evidence including several hours of vidio tape. They did't just review the trial courts procedure.
Thanks, Republicans.
Judging Courage
I'm disturbed. I've just finished watching a round of television programs where Judge Greer was once again assailed as lawless, power-grabbing, and out of control. On a mission to kill, it's said.
This is horribly difficult to watch. I cannot help but think that well meaning, honest Americans are home watching these programs, thinking there must be some truth behind the repeated assertions that a single judge or two have turned the justice system upside down. The public deserves better.
Florida law told Judge Greer what he had to do here. Once fate chose him as the judge in the case, he was responsible for following the law laid out by both the Florida Supreme Court and the Florida Legislature, all of which said that where those close to the incapacitated person cannot agree on what the ward would choose to do, then the court should resolve the matter.
Judge Greer is a Republican and a Southern Baptist. No doubt he has his own views about what he thinks he would do, or what he thinks might be in Terri's best interests. But he was charged with deciding only what Terri would do. He found the evidence presented at trial clear and convincing that Terri would choose not to have her life prolonged by the affirmative intervention of modern medicine. Three appellate judges unanimously affirmed that decision.
I receive email after email telling me that no judge has the authority to end someone's life. That life must be preserved where there is even unreasonable hope, or where there is any uncertainty regarding the person's wishes. That oral evidence can never be clear and convincing. That removing "life support" is okay, but removing a feeding tube is barbaric and unacceptable. Perhaps those sentiments are noble, but they are not the law, and it was not within Judge Greer's power to make them the law. It is perfectly acceptable to disagree with the law on these points, but to condemn the judge for following the law as it exists is irresponsible and contrary to the basic principles on which our government, with its separate branches, was created.
I continue to emphasize that I have no opinion on whether the trial judge reached the result Terri would truly want. I did not attend the trial, and having not seen the witnesses and heard them testify, experience has taught me that I am insufficiently informed to second-guess the decision -- no matter how many facts I learn about the case. I do know that a decision was made. I also know that the judicial system offers the checks necessary to ensure that the law has been properly followed. Judge Greer is part of that system, and he operated within it to perform his required role. Those who condemn him, and the judiciary that has thus far upheld his decisions, do not know what they do.
by Matt Conigliaro http://abstractappeal.com/
The Cruzan case...The Browinging case and the Fla. Constitution were the benchmarks in Fl. law as it pertains to end of life laws in the State.
Browning case...(correction)
Ya, vas done completely according to zee law!
/sarcasm
Can you tell me why all of these courts seem to be ignorant of Article One, Section Two of the Florida Constitution and the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution??
moot, spurious arguments. screw the locals' grass. What happened inside that Hospice blew away Auschwitz in its sheer brazenness. That's as far as I got through your post. Sorry.
You still did not answer my questions about the end-of-life panels and their lawmaking abilities.
This needs to be investigated as Project Grace is also a national organization that could exert its influence in many states.
A steaming pile, that one is.
He had no right to 'resolve the matter' by issuing what was in fact a death warrant, ordering that she SHALL be killed.
He broke the fundamental law of the land; the Constitution.
And that act of lawlessness cost Terri Schiavo everything.
So, is 'abstractappeal' your website?
I have never said it's my view "that God approves of the murder of those who are disabled/dependant/helpless/needing food-water/etc." You're free to review my posts to find an instance where I ever said anything even resembling that, but you'll search in vain. Because your entire post is based on a false premise, I will not respond to the rest of it.
In the final analysis, the difficult question that faced the trial court was whether Theresa Marie Schindler Schiavo, not after a few weeks in a coma, but after ten years in a persistent vegetative state that has robbed her of most of her cerebrum and all but the most instinctive of neurological functions, with no hope of a medical cure but with sufficient money and strength of body to live indefinitely, would choose to continue the constant nursing care and the supporting tubes in hopes that a miracle would somehow recreate her missing brain tissue, or whether she would wish to permit a natural death process to take its course and for her family members and loved ones to be free to continue their lives. After due consideration, we conclude that the trial judge had clear and convincing evidence to answer this question as he did.
http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/2dcaorder01-01.txt
I'm not Matt Conigliaro
That's not what I asked you. Is it your site?
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.