Posted on 01/29/2006 10:06:22 AM PST by NormsRevenge
Cboldt is one of FRee Republics experts when it comes to judicial issues.
because she was not a criminal. she was simply a chest of drawers willed to someone who wanted to turn it into firewood.
All murders are "end of life" decisions.
They only looked at the evidence in the eyes of one judge, who happened to be legally blind.
THANK YOU!!!!
The muddled thinking by our "leaders" in government on
life and death issues is beyond chilling.
Wake up America, we are beginning to repeat Hitler's Germany.
That's why you're not a conservative.
>>>
uh, that's why I'm not an exterminationist. You're the non-conservative.
Not killing people has ALWAYS been the default setting, TyphoidMary.
It is pervasive on this forum,
.............................................
I think the issue of protecting life and the ramifications of this principle is somehow connected with their misunderstanding of the dangers of big brother/govt. on the part of some.
They confuse a healthy state interest in maintaining the security of our nation and its people with an overarching "nanny" state and its tendency to overlegislate.
In short they are confused and angry. I wonder if they'd mind a state apparatus that promotes abortion and euthanasia? Somehow I think that many FR libertarians would object to that as well. But they seem oblivious to the fact that abortion and euthanasia are being promoted by orgs like Hospice (insurance corporates) and the film industry and the well known so called civil liberties groups including the libertarian movement.
The most expendible (unborn and elderly/sick)are fair game at the altar of individuality and selfishness.
I'm not impressed with Cboldt's analysis. There have been other lawyers on FR who have given a much more thorough analysis of the issues.
That's right. When you can't support your position, resort to name-calling to obfuscate the issues.
LOL well there are a hell of a lot of people here at FR that go to Cboldt when there is a question regarding the judiciary.
"I have."
Well then you should know better.
I doubt that you are even aware of the posts that contain my review and analysis of the case. I also have no problem with you having a closed mind.
There have been other lawyers on FR who have given a much more thorough analysis of the issues.
"Much more thorough" meaning that my analysis omits some points of argument that others covered. Which points?
Thanks very much....
Regarding your post #328...Many people really dont want to talk about end-of-life issues in general, and particularly about their own end of life decisions...And I dont know why that is...I dont have a problem with it, perhaps because of my own personal experiences in my own life, and therefore I just dont have a problem with it...
I know when my husband and I sat my son down, and wanted to talk to him about these issues concerning this issue, he was reluctant...I could tell, emotionally he thinks I and my husband are going to live for many more years...but we are in our 60s now, and at that stage anything can happen...so he contemplated things and realized that we were right...he is the only child we have now, and so he is of course, someone we will come to rely on in the future, as we age...he is more than willing to help us with decisions, and he is willing to act for us, if we cannot act for ourselves...and for that I am grateful, that much as he would like to have us around for many more decades, and much as we would like to be around for many more decades, that wish needs to be tempered with reality....
So my son, knows exactly what I do and dont want, and he knows what my husband does and does not want...and interestingly, my husband and I have very different ideas about this...but we are both able to make our own decisions, and know that we can rely on our spouse and our son, should we need that persons help....
Therefore, I am content, that my wishes will be honored, with my family standing by supporting me in those decisions...judges, lawyers, Congress, and busybodies are unwelcome...
Only if it's done in the bedroom. The bedroom has constitutional rights.
Then you misrepresent you position regularly. I read quite well, have had B$ filters installed for years. You and the rest of the Hemlock Society should be out gathering your herbs and leave the rest of us to live our lives in peace.
Amen
I said what I mean and meant what I said. I don't have some secret agenda, I don't want to see anyone die. I merely recognize that sometimes they do. And I identify with the many many people who have loved and cared for family members as they died from disease or old age. I respect them, and I respect their decisions about what's right. Too many ship folks off to a nursing home and ignore them 'cept an hour on an occasional Saturday. I will do my best to make sure I am able to be there for my own remaining family. Caring for them very very well at home is one of the most rewarding things we can do for our loved ones.
So to you and all your hysterical, obsessed, mean-spirited friends, who come on these threads, misrepresent and distort our point of view, and attack anyone not willing to drink your Kool-Aid lies about Terri Schiavo, you can just piss off.
With cancer patients yes you are correct. When they are nearing death they aspirate food, and thus in that event a feeding tube is NOT a good idea. BUT TERRI WAS NOT DYING.
Feeding tubes, do not even require electricity and are not modern technolgy in the same sense that heart and lung machines are. Believe it or not the earliest feeding tubes existed in Egyptian times. They were used with some regularity in the civil war, and their last innovation was in the late 70's, early 80's.
Well, Hair, you have summarized this well...I am sure that none of us wants to actually see someone die...some of us just dont think, that busybodies, the govt. or anyone else who has no vested interest in the end of life decisions of our loved ones, should be allowed to intrude and substitute their views for ours...
I had to put up with that nonsense concerning not just my dad, but also my mom, and even with my son...I would have done anything within reason to keep them alive...the one thing I would not do, is go against my parents wishes, nor subject my son to futile treatments...
You know, my son was declared brain dead, not just by one test, but by a myriad of tests...showing not only was he brain dead, but that the hemorrahge in his brain was so large, that absolutely no oxygen was getting into his brain...yet there were those busybodies, who claimed I should not believe this, as my goodness, they probably just want his organs...now that was some nitwit saying that...since my son died from cancer, none of his organs could ever be used for anyone...but that did not stop some rude busybodies telling me I killed my son, by allowed him to be disconnected from the ventilator...
There will always be hysterics, who see shadows and conspiracies and such, even when they dont exist.....that is unfortunately, part of the human condition...
Rational, thoughtful discussion is what is always the most productive...hysteria, false claims, name calling and such are just baby tactics, and non productive tactics at that...
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.