Quote:
|
Originally Posted by scaeagles
Sorry, Mickey, but you're wrong. The "sanctity of marriage" issue is completely unrelated and a total red herring.
Again, ending starving her to death is completely based on the word of one man. Not enough there.
|
Completely disagree. This is not a red herring. The
law clearly states that as her husband, he is the only one with the authority to make this decision. These politicians are saying that the law should not be respected and that his rights are not valid. If that isn't a violation of the sanctity of marriage, I don't know what is. The courts have ruled over and over and over again that her parents do not have the right to make this decision. Nor do the clergy. That right lies with her husband solely so yes, in this case, the word of one man
is enough. That is law and if people don't like it, they are more than able to change it. Until then, it should be followed.
I have yet to hear one independent doctor, one who does not have a special interest in this case, state that they feel there is any hope of recovery for this poor woman. She is being kept alive out of denial of the facts. And people like Bill Frist, who is a doctor and should know better, are using this for political reasons.
If Terry is kept alive, she will live out the next 10,20,30 + years, in exactly the same state that she has lived in for the last 16. Would anyone here really want that for themselves or a loved one?