Ok, i have no problem spreading the blame for this travesty to anyone and everyone who is responsible for it.
Remember, i'm not a blind Bush basher....and your silence on the bill itself speaks volumes. There just is no way to defend this monster within the contexts of our constitutional laws. All who are a part of it's passing are guilty of following the tenet that the "end justifies the means". > You forgot to mention that the legislation Bush signed passed the > House and the Senate. > > http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,151092,00.html > After working throughout the day and evening on Sunday, the House > passed a bill 203-58 overnight Monday to move Schiavo's case to a > federal court to determine whether Schiavo's husband, Michael Schiavo > (search), or her parents, Bob and Mary Schindler (search), have > authority over her fate. Terri Schiavo's parents have fought for seven > years in the Florida court system to prevent her death. On Friday, her > feeding tube was removed per her husband's wishes and a state court > order. > > All but five of the 161 Republicans present in the House voted for the > measure, while the 100 Democrats who attended the vote were nearly > evenly split. One hundred seventy-four members did not return from > their Easter recess to cast a vote. The Senate unanimously passed an > identical bill on Sunday. > > > > On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 13:07:22 -0600, G wrote: >> The legislation that Bush signed is even more egregious than what we >> previously thought, Gruss. >> >> Did you know that the rule explicitly states that "any parent of Theresa >> Marie Schiavo" has the standing to sue in Federal Court to keep her >> alive? >> >> Read an editorial in that old liberal rag the New York Times this >> afternoon. >> I wonder if even the ardent supporters of keeping Ms. Schiavo alive can >> find >> a way to defend this particular ruling. How do you reconcile this >> particular >> ruling against the concept of "a nation of laws, not of men" ?? >> >> How many laws are on the books granting certain rights only to named >> individuals? >> >> > >> > STATE courts are checked by STATE legislature! >> > >> > This is the FEDERAL legislature using the FEDERAL courts to OVERRULE >> > the STATE courts. >> > >> > Put another way, is it your contention that any laws a state >> > legislature passes, or rulings a state court makes, should be up for >> > review by federal courts and/or the federal legislature? >> > >> > If your answer is "yes" then you are what has been historically called >> > "a liberal" but what is now called conservative (like Australia). >> > >> > If your answer is "no" then you agree with me, favor State's rights, >> > and are against "federal activists" <-- my new term. >> > >> > >> >> > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble Ticket application http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:151299 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
