I agree, this is a path I don't think we want to start down. While this is a difficult situation, surely there has to be a better solution than this.

Tom Delay :"Speaker Hastert is empowered to call the House back into emergency session, which he will do tomorrow afternoon - Palm Sunday - at one o'clock"

From the Corner

The thing about slippery slope arguments is that sometimes they are dead on. In the Dutch case the original euthanasia laws specified "only with consent" and people who made the slippery slope argument were discounted. 10+ years down the slope the case is now "only with consent - except for those who cannot give consent". I don't really see any logical reason preventing the "only with consent -- except for those who will not consent" from being created by "Unique and special circumstances" 10 or more years down the slope.

I agree about the slippery slope argument...however, the left has been using it against conservatives for years. The slopes are always slippery and the sky is always falling.

And the one great thing about the left is that they can dish it out but they can't take it. So, for no other reason, I think they should be fed as much of it as possible...Maybe they'll short circuit.

Keep up the thought-provoking posts on Terri. I think this might be another instance in which the bloggers have made a difference in redirecting news and information on an important issue

But we do seem to galloping towards a general acceptance of euthanasia in the interests of "mercy" for a stricken patient.

Do the Gov't have any better solutions for the upcoming Social-ist InSecurity/Medi(s)care failures?

Follow the money...

But we do seem to galloping towards a general acceptance of euthanasia in the interests of "mercy" for a stricken patient.

Do the Gov't have any better solutions for the upcoming Social-ist InSecurity/Medi(s)care failures?

Follow the money...

But we do seem to galloping towards a general acceptance of euthanasia in the interests of "mercy" for a stricken patient.

Does the Gov't have any better solutions for the upcoming Social-ist InSecurity/Medi(s)care failures?

Follow the money...

"Drop dead"? Perhaps the Supreme Court lapsed into federalism and constitutionalism; it still happens sometimes. I maintain that it's better to allow most matters to be handled by the states and people, even though we know that each matter will often be handled badly. It's surely not the case that things suddenly get better, let alone stay better, when the federal government nationalizes some new area of responsibility. Moreover, the more new, unenumerated powers the federal government arrogates to itself, the worse is its execution of its core responsibilities.

If the whole federal government would go back to what it was in the beginning--a unitary diplomatic bloc, a military alliance, a trade organization with enforcement powers, a means of arbitration between governments, and a means for providing a republican guarantee to the subjects of each government--the United States would be able to complete its takeover of the world in the course of a few hundred years. It was so well-constituted that it was on course to become in reality everything that the U.N. was intended to become but, of course, was too ill-constituted ever to be. Instead, the federal government has traded its birthright of worldwide, federal, republican governance, for the nanny statists' bowl of red beans.

I am generally not interested in the gov't getting involved in state affairs, but I AM manking an exception in the Terri S case. Let's face, there is not credible evidence out there that her condition has been neutarally and throrughly evaluated. Her husband's behaviour, ex. his refusal to let her to be wheeled out into the sun, also add to the controversy. One woman on a Fox call in show had is right when she said that "Terri had made a decision to live. If she'd really wanted to die she would have done it sometime over the past 12 years." People can will themselves to death - the foundation of voodoo killing. Terri hasn't. Terry wants to live. That shuold be the end of the argument.

I wouldn't necessarily say that the SCOTUS is saying "Drop Dead" to Terri Schiavo, Ace. Moreover, this is something they would rather be dealt with in the State (THAT would be a new thing for them), but refusing to hear a case without comment doesn't mean they don't think the case has merit (that's obviously not the case), they may just want the State to decide for itself in this matter. It doesn't prevent them from hearing it at a later time, hopefully with Terri's feeding tube reinsterted (*fingers crossed*), it just means they won't hear it now.

Mapes wrote, "If she'd (Terri) really wanted to die she would have done it sometime over the past 12 years." People can will themselves to death - the foundation of voodoo killing. Terri hasn't. Terry wants to live. That shuold be the end of the argument."

O.K. Mapes did you forget to take your meds today. See theses are the type of people who are in support of taking away our state rights.

oops make that rabidfox sorry mapes