Since all of your points were addressed in the essay, you and I apparently start from very different premises.
In determining whether something is legally right or wrong, the motives of those in the debate are not relevant. My whole essay avoids judgment of the family members. The focus is on the involvement--inappropriate involvement, in my estimation--of groups with agendas, turning Terry Schiavo into an ideological football. You obviously have no problem with that misuse of a family tragedy.
Which makes you the irrational ideologue who has a minimal understanding of Florida law.
My whole essay avoids judgment of the family members.
Right, which is a tacit admission that you neither understand the issues in general or the Florida statutes in particular. Which necessarily means you wrote from ignorance.
The focus is on the involvement--inappropriate involvement, in my estimation--of groups with agendas, turning Terry Schiavo into an ideological football.
LOL, everybody has an agenda. You obviously have an agenda but you simply think your agenda trumps everybody elses agenda. A pluralist country encourages "agendas' in the public square so discourse can follow. That's how America works, comprende?
You obviously have no problem with that misuse of a family tragedy.
Ad hominem doesn't bother me, it simply means you've got nothing to offer. Such is life.
You obviously do not have any detective skills.