 |
|  |
 |
|
GePap
|
 |
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001 time: 23:34
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
Yeah, let's hope no one gets killed... |

Let Terry Schiavo die already. Who gives a **** what you or anyone else thinks? That is the basic point of this case, I, you, nor anyone else should have a say in this save the immidiate people involved, and given they disagreed, the courts had to decide, and they decided to let her die (and no, she won;t suffer pain, nor hunger pangs nor any of that bullshit).
If any side is filled with self-righteous, arrogant, selfish moralists trampling on people's rights are the "pro-lifers" in this case. I Do hope this comes and bites them in the ass, and I think there is a good chance it will- people don;t like politicians getting involved in something so terribly personal.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
GePap
|
 |
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001 time: 23:34
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
quote: Which is why what Congress did is vastly more immoral than anything being done in this case in Florida, or by any of the parties- they are endangering the US system of checks and balances. Shame on them. |
Good post on the subject...
http://althouse.blogspot.com/2005/0...federalism.html |
Not really. The head of the judiciary committe in the house, during the debate, when explaining why THIS bill was needed explained that in our current system the federal courts could already issue a writ of habeous Corpus (spelling), but in doing so, they assume the facts as defined in the state court to be correct.
Hence, the basis for this law is to overturn the prior court case by giving the feds the right to ignore the finding of the lower court, and not rule simply on possible procedural mistakes or issue.
This si what makes the law an affront to our legal system. If we want to compare this to a criminal case- imagine Congress deciding that even thought someone has been found guilty by a state court, that we are going to say that a Federal court can now have jurisdiction of the case, and in making its decision, can ignore the rulings of the state court.... That is the valid comparison. And I hope you see why its wrong.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
chegitz guevara
|
 |
Ft. Lauderdale, FL Communist Party of Apolyton
Jun 2000 time: 00:34
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
quote: though I was hoping to find out exactly why she collapsed. |
I don't think they know for sure. |
Yes, they do know for sure. She had a heart attack resulting from a potassium imbalance due to her diet. No blood was pumping for five minutes, which pretty much meant her frontal cortex died of oxygen depreivation.
quote: As for the condition of her brain, I would be more inclined to believe Michael Schiavo's experts if they would actually do a modern brain scan on the woman. Her last scan was a CAT scan in 1996, which is not nearly as accurate as modern PET or MRI scans. I can't think of any good reason why they haven't done such a scan, which makes me suspicious. |
I have to say that this is an incredibly specious argument. A CAT scan is perfectly good at showing what's missing. If you saw a person was an amputee, would you insist that they get an MRI to make sure, since your eyes aren't as modern as an MRI? Sure, an MRI would show more detail, but what you fail to understand is that the area in question doesn't exist to have detail shown. It's not like a CAT scan is going to show an area of the brain as not existing if it' there.
Why you couldn't figure this out on your own is beyond me. I thought you wre supposed to be smart. 
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:34. Apolyton Time is 00:34. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|