SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: JDN who wrote (676168)3/21/2005 11:30:04 AM
From: CYBERKEN  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 769670
 
So she couldn't call the shot on her own DEATH by simply talking to her husband before her demise. But 15 years after her death she can DIVORCE him?

That's something even the hillbillies would have trouble swallowing...



To: JDN who wrote (676168)3/21/2005 11:33:37 AM
From: DuckTapeSunroof  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
Destroying traditional marriage:

Re: "But, we all know that is a marraige in NAME ONLY."

What we "all know" is infotainment *crap*. The man was legally married to this woman when the medical tragedy happened, and he remains legally married to her now. (As for his finding companionship with another, after many years of being deprived of his wive's company... who among us can fault him?)

"Were Terri in possession of all her abilities she would divorce him"

Idle speculation, and legally immaterial.

Re: "All things considered, shouldn't her parents have the right to intervene?"

Only if you CHANGE 500+ years of common law about MARRIAGE!

If you want to over-ride the established law giving married couples the right to make decisions for the benefit of each other --- and insert some kind of made-up rule saying that parents can OVER-RIDE decisions of a married couple, then it's a WHOLE NEW BALL GAME!

You would have just succeeded in *destroying traditional marriage* as it has been known for many hundreds, maybe thousands, of years!