Re: "What are you relying on........your opinion?"
Testimony not heard by the "law" in this case. By the by, 7 years is, as I recall, how long it took for Michael to claim Terri had said he wouldn't want to live. I also understand he'd stated, according to affadavits, that he "didn't know" what her wishes would be, prior to purporting to know.
Re: " I am not about to get into this one."
It is obvious to me that both you and the law should consider legitimate evidence as to the Husbands prior statements and motivations. That can't be wrong.
You should look at my commentary concerning M. Schiavo the adulterer, because I noted I'd be inclined to rule just as the Judge has, were it not for the evidence which he wrongly refused to admit, IMO.
Re: "I think religious ideologues are the most dangerous people in the world. I would prefer these people would be kept in their homes under house arrest. I know that's not possible but it is my wish nonetheless."
While I agree wholeheartedly as to the danger religious ideologues pose, I feel your desired method to control them is facist, unconstinutional, and pretty sick in general. Your sense of the value of freedom is lacking, IMO, and therefore keeping you and others like you under house arrest rather than them, I think, would be more valuable to society, if equally wrong.
Well, this is the perfect place to advise being careful what you wish for. You could be next.
Dan B. |
