I haven't seen the bill but I thought that laws relating to individuals were unconstitutional.
Dana On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 13:33:08 -0600, G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 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. > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support efficiency by 100% http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:151300 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=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
