Terri Schiavo: who said what and when, will she wake up, bla fucking bla

[Goldmund]

It's not up to us to discuss or decide that. Would the "cruel and unusual" in this case be to let her die, or to keep her alive but hollow and immobile? That's a complex emotional and legal issue, requiring many more specific facts than any of us know and a much deeper spiritual bond with who Terri was than any of us have -- and it's an issue in which both sides could be tragic. Would it be mercy or murder to disconnect the tube? Would it be perverse and againt her wishes, or a continuation of hope, to not? The decision belongs to her family, and if there is a dispute, it is up to the relevant courts to resolve it. And they have.

But then, the GOP steps in -- the legislative and the executive branch -- and they do something unconstitutional in two ways:

1) They overrule the court that has the default jurisdiction of this case, and engage in shameless court-shopping. You know what "we'll overrule courts until we find one that will decide our way" amounts to? A de-facto cancellation of the judicial branch;

2) They enact a law that is esentially for the benefit, or the detriment -- depending on what you believe in this case -- of a single individual. You know what "We're enacting a law that was tailored for and in practice applies to a particular individual" amounts to? Inequality in the eyes of the law. If laws can be written for a particular person, then we are not all equal under the law.

This case is a trial balloon for much more malignant applications of these same principles. Stay tuned.

[The_Casual_Observer]

1. This whole thing is the beginning of martial law.

After all, as Bork said, there isn't any constitutional right to privacy. I'm waiting to hear a discussion along these lines on NPR in order to "test the waters"

[rodeodance]

2. Hannity is sitting down by the hospise selling his hate tonight--

[Goldmund]

3. What a ghoul.

[Goldmund]

4. .

[northamericancitizen]

5. Scary nt