I hope y'all are happy....

[dilloduck]

Mr. P may well be right, that is my misgivings. I agree with the idea of siding with life, but to involve the feds here is opening something that shouldn't be.

nothing is gained without taking a risk---if you are satisfied with the mess I guess silence and ignoring it is the answer. Sorta takes away your right to bitch about it tho

 

[Mr. P]

May as well open it up and deal with it---denial is certain to fail.

denial? what ? That you have privacy? That your choices should be yours and yours alone? That you and your wife may confide in each other with trust and the GOVERNMENT nor strangers will ever interfer?

 

[dilloduck]

denial? what ? That you have privacy? That your choices should be yours and yours alone? That you and your wife may confide in each other with trust and the GOVERNMENT nor strangers will ever interfer?

If the Feds bow to State rights in this case it is the PERFECT time to uninvite them from all their other unwanted and unconstitutional involvement !!!!!

 

[Annie]

nothing is gained without taking a risk---if you are satisfied with the mess I guess silence and ignoring it is the answer. Sorta takes away your right to bitch about it tho

Not really being quiet about it. I wrote to all my reps. I made it very clear that my misgivings with this are the same as Roe V Wade, they are state's issues.

 

[dilloduck]

Not really being quiet about it. I wrote to all my reps. I made it very clear that my misgivings with this are the same as Roe V Wade, they are state's issues.

great job----it's not such a can of worms is it?

 

[Mr. P]

If the Feds bow to State rights in this case it is the PERFECT time to uninvite them from all their other unwanted and unconstitutional involvement !!!!!

So are you saying there is something in the US Constitution that prevents the removal of a feeding tube? I'll remind you the US SUP. Court refused to hear this case...Which pretty much answers that question I think.

 

[dilloduck]

So are you saying there is something in the US Constitution that prevents the removal of a feeding tube? I'll remind you the US SUP. Court refused to hear this case...Which pretty much answers that question I think.

No--I think the feds will bow to FL courts decision and she will die HOWEVER in this time when they are hesitant to interfere with the right of states they are vulnerable to critiscism of the OTHER thing they do to stomp on states rights. A brave and smart tactician would surely take advantage of this if there were any out there. Like poker---raise the bet.

 

[Annie]

great job----it's not such a can of worms is it?

Yes it is. There is now a federal judge deciding whether or not the feeding tube remains out or is replaced. There is no way that I don't want to see Terri receive nourishment, I think that is basic, not extraordinary. Just do not think it should be coming from the feds.

 

[dilloduck]

Yes it is. There is now a federal judge deciding whether or not the feeding tube remains out or is replaced. There is no way that I don't want to see Terri receive nourishment, I think that is basic, not extraordinary. Just do not think it should be coming from the feds.

All they are doing is kow towing to the state----don't think that gives em too much "power" to gloat about. Florida wins and the fed stamps it with their approval. big deal

 

[Annie]

All they are doing is kow towing to the state----don't think that gives em too much "power" to gloat about. Florida wins and the fed stamps it with their approval. big deal

How do you figure that? I'm assuming you are predicting that the feds will back the state? So what was the point? That GOP is arguing for national interdiction? And that helps, how?

 

[Mr. P]

No--I think the feds will bow to FL courts decision and she will die HOWEVER in this time when they are hesitant to interfere with the right of states they are vulnerable to critiscism of the OTHER thing they do to stomp on states rights. A brave and smart tactician would surely take advantage of this if there were any out there. Like poker---raise the bet.

The problem is Dillo, this is not a game.

 

[dilloduck]

How do you figure that? I'm assuming you are predicting that the feds will back the state? So what was the point? That GOP is arguing for national interdiction? And that helps, how?

It validates their pro-life postion-----it represents a retalitaion for the judicial system overstepping its authority by making laws instead of letting Congress as represented by the people !! Maybe a gesture for now but like I said--possiblities for rebuilding if someone has the balls to act instead of just bitch

 

[OCA]

There is, all too often, "nothing in writing". Legal precedent gives Terri Schiavo's husband the authorty to make the decisions regarding her medical care. Had he died or had they not been married, THEN, that authority would have passed to her parents. The problem here being that her parents were unwilling to accept the reality of the situation.

You're wrong as usual. With nothing in writing Mr. Schiavo has no legal recourse to kill his wife nor do the parents have recourse to keep the vegetable alive for the rest of her life.

I suppose its in the proper place as much as I hate the feds stepping in.

 

[Bonnie]

But do we all see the tangled web here? Conservatives don't want court interference with states rights concerning queer marriage but they want the court to interfere here. Libs don't want the court to interfere here but celebrate Roe v Wade. This is a freakin mess.

True there are problems but take comfort in the fact that this legislation was very narrow in it's scope so as to not set any precedents. I don't mind them inserting themselves in this one particular case because Terri herself has never been represented by an attorney. She is hopefully getting her due process finally.

 

[dilloduck]

You're wrong as usual. With nothing in writing Mr. Schiavo has no legal recourse to kill his wife nor do the parents have recourse to keep the vegetable alive for the rest of her life.

I suppose its in the proper place as much as I hate the feds stepping in.

IT"S ONLY A GESTURE!

 

[OCA]

That's the way I see it too...
That's (one reason) why I say...everyone BUTT OUT. I don't want the Feds. in my personal life...many here are inviting it, asking for it...GEEZZZZZ...

I'm afraid that this is gonna fuck everything up concerning stopping the queer lifestyle choice perversionists from contaminating marriage. They will nowlegal precedent to tell conservatives that hey you stopped Schiavo by using the courts we are now going to challenge the morally right and honestly good anti-queer marriage laws on the books. All this, and yes I understand the value of life but I know if i'm her....put a bullet in my left lobe, for what end result I don't know. We may be shooting ourselves in the foot here.

 

[OCA]

IT"S ONLY A GESTURE!

What is the gesture?

 

[Annie]

IT"S ONLY A GESTURE!

Now that is sick.

 

[Mr. P]

....We may be shooting ourselves in the foot here.

There's no Maybe about it. IMO

 

[dilloduck]

I'm afraid that this is gonna fuck everything up concerning stopping the queer lifestyle choice perversionists from contaminating marriage. They will nowlegal precedent to tell conservatives that hey you stopped Schiavo by using the courts we are now going to challenge the morally right and honestly good anti-queer marriage laws on the books. All this, and yes I understand the value of life but I know if i'm her....put a bullet in my left lobe, for what end result I don't know. We may be shooting ourselves in the foot here.

only if the feds overturn the states which I doubt will happen---the judge is now considering his verdict BUT taking his time and Terri is getting worse quickly--notice he did not IMMEDIATLEY order the tube be reinserted?