Schiavo Thread Part the Third

[Ned]

Originally posted by Sava
Ned you're grasping at straws here... the points you're harping on are really quite irrelevant. I'm actually embarassed for you. Please stop and avoid further embarassment.

Anyways, Terri's body will die soon. All this will be moot.

And the issue will be settled, for those of us with the ability to reason. A full autopsy will be performed and Terri's brain will be looked at. The autopsy will confirm the facts in this case, but the fundies will never accept it.

And what facts are you suggesting that I am ignoring, Sava. You can read the Judge's opinion for yourself. That is what I rely on when I say that there is not agreement among the experts about whether Terri's cerebral cortex is entirely gone or only partially gone. Whatever is the case, though, there I agree that there is no hope for a recovery without some dramatic breakthru in medicine, such as from stem cell research, which would enable someone to regrow brain tissue.

Now the evidence concerning broken bones is not fantasy, Sava. It is discussed in a written opinion by the judge. http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/tr...1-02-scan.pdf.

The witnesses (3) to Michael Schiavo's prior inconsistent statements were not "discredited" as contended by some here. The simply were not allowed to testify at all because that would have required a new trial on the issue of Terri's intent. http://www.2dca.org/opinion/October%.../2d01-3626.pdf

Much of what has been said here by supporters of Michael Schiavo is complete and utter bull. There is a great deal of propaganda being set forth. I agree with that. But most of it appears to be coming from the Michael Schiavo camp.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Guynemer


Of course not. What I am saying is that

1) all these stories of her asking to live, responding to people, etc., and just bull**** and/or wishful thinking.

2) whether or not she would want to live in such a state is ultimately up to her caregivers.

I have no fundamental disagreement with this either. Most people seem to agree that so long as her parents want to care for her, they should be allowed to do so absent a clear message from Terri herself that she would rather die.

[Drake Tungsten]

On that, you and I have common ground.

But I also think that Congress is hardly the ideal body to address moral questions.

We're somewhat in agreement on this. I don't approve of the actions of Congress in this case. That being said, I do believe Congress is a more suitable body to address moral issues than the judicial system.

Most people seem to agree that so long as her parents want to care for her, they should be allowed to do so absent a clear message from Terri herself that she would rather die.

I agree. It seems especially wrong to kill her absent a clear indication of her wishes when she has people who are more than willing to care for her.

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Ned
Shawn, the knock on Greer is that he is said to be conservative judge who follows the law and not his heart.

Isn't that good? That's what I want from a judge. They are there, after all, to interpret the laws based on what they view the legislature intended, not read into it their own biases.

And how does that jive with the judicial activism rap he has been getting?

(yes I know this was from days ago)

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Ned
"Just once, we need an elected official to stand up to a clearly incorrect ruling by a court. Any incorrect ruling will do, but my vote is for a state court that has ordered a disabled woman to be starved to death at the request of her adulterous husband.
http://www.anncoulter.com/

Ann Coulter really does not have a grasp on this three branches balance of power thing, does she.

[Drake Tungsten]

How is it a balance of power if the other two branches never attempt to check the judiciary?

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
How is it a balance of power if the other two branches never attempt to check the judiciary?

The legislatures have the ability to pass laws directing the courts. In this specific case they tried and failed. Don't blame the judiciary for Congress' lack of political will/cohesion.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Ned
"Just once, we need an elected official to stand up to a clearly incorrect ruling by a court. Any incorrect ruling will do, but my vote is for a state court that has ordered a disabled woman to be starved to death at the request of her adulterous husband.

...

President Andrew Jackson is supposed to have said of a Supreme Court ruling he opposed: "Well, John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it." The court's ruling was ignored. And yet, somehow, the republic survived.
http://www.anncoulter.com/

So let me get this straight: in one breathtaking article, Ann Coulter piously expresses the need to save Terri's life AND her approval for the Trail of Tears, an action that would fit most modern definitions of genocide.

And Ned is quoting her on it approvingly.

Yeah, that all seems about right. Carry on.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ned
even accepting the fact that she her higher level brian functions no longer exist, are you making a statement here that such people no longer have any right to live?

I make the statement that such "people" are not people. They are nothing more than bags of meat. Everything that makes you who you are, your personality, your beliefs, your memories: that is all in and only in your cerebral cortex. Once that's gone, not only will you never be who you once were, you'll never be anybody ever again. I would even go further and argue that if you could successfully destroy a person's frontal cortex but otherwise leave them alive, that you are a murderer.

[Ned]

Originally posted by asleepathewheel


Ann Coulter really does not have a grasp on this three branches balance of power thing, does she.

Ann is calling for executive intervention despite the court rulings. That is pure Jacksonian in its arrogance. But it is exactly what Reno/Clinton did in the Elian Gonzales case. Clinton/Rene were not impeached for that one, although the reaction of Foridians was so heated that it cost Gore the election.

I don't think that either Bush will stoop to what Jackson or Clinton/Reno did and ignore the judiciary as Republicans are supportive of the judiciary as a whole. But, given the enormous hosile reaction to their inaction, I suspect that this inaction will cost Jeb and maybe Republicans in general in future elections.

[Ned]

Originally posted by asleepathewheel


The legislatures have the ability to pass laws directing the courts. In this specific case they tried and failed. Don't blame the judiciary for Congress' lack of political will/cohesion.

Just now on Hardball, a Congressman said that he is going to try to make one more attempt to pass legislation protecting Terri, or if it is too late for that, for future Terries.

[Ned]

Rufus, I don't support illegal executive intervention. Let me make that clear now.

However, Jeb Bush, IMHO, could have acted before he was enjoined. His failure to act in time is where he went wrong. He should have personally lead the troops on the rescue mission. If he had, he would have been successful, I am sure of that.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ned
it is exactly what Reno/Clinton did in the Elian Gonzales case.

No, the Courts were on Elian's father's side.

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Ned
Just now on Hardball, a Congressman said that he is going to try to make one more attempt to pass legislation protecting Terri, or if it is too late for that, for future Terries.

Which is the way this should be done. Why be angry with the judge for working in the framework given to him by the florida legislature.

The legislature passes laws, the judiciary interprets them and pushes the language to limits and beyond and the legislature responds by passing altered statutes. that's how this whole thing is supposed to function.

[Ned]

Che, I don't fundamentally disagree with you. My original post on this topic reflected the fact that were there no disputes on any of these issues and were it clear that the unfortunate victim of cardiac arrest left clear indications of no wish to continue in a vegative state, I would support what happened in the movie Million Dollar Baby.