Patting the wrists, rolling the eyes.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
The trial court made the finding by clear and convincing evidence. Of course, you can question what the standard of proof should be in this type of case, or in any case. But this same group of people hardly gets so anguished when a murderer is convicted based on only circumstantial evidence.

Are you comparing Terri to a murderer? As a lawyer you should know that the term circumstantial evidence is not the same as weak evidence. Without circumstantial evidence most guilty men and women would walk free. Before a murderer is put to death, the burden of prove is beyond a resonable doubt. Before you execute an innocent person (taking the feeding tube away is a slow form of execution), shouldn't you show that they wanted to die beyond a reasonable doubt?

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Spanky
Before you execute an innocent person (taking the feeding tube away is a slow form of execution), shouldn't you show that they wanted to die beyond a reasonable doubt?

I think the people of a state are entitled to decide for themselves what level of proof they would want, and have their courts enforce it.

If you're worried that you'll be too easily disconnected, do as Bilmore says and sign the piece of paper.

(and, as for evidence, circumstantial evidence often is weak evidence)

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Spanky
Are you comparing Terri to a murderer? As a lawyer you should know that the term circumstantial evidence is not the same as weak evidence. Without circumstantial evidence most guilty men and women would walk free. Before a murderer is put to death, the burden of prove is beyond a resonable doubt. Before you execute an innocent person (taking the feeding tube away is a slow form of execution), shouldn't you show that they wanted to die beyond a reasonable doubt?

One thing left I wanted to say is I do respect the Catholic Church's position on life. They believe only God should decide who lives and dies. So the catholic church is also against the death penalty. But there are many protestants that invoke religion when it comes to cases like Terri's saying only God should take life yet support the death penalty. (btw, I am a Protestant so I can rag on my own kind without being a Bigot). I have noticed that there are a lot of Catholics who want Pro-Choice politicians to not get comunion, but think it is OK for Jeb Bush, who is a Catholic to get comunion even though he supports the death penalty.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Gattigap
If you could accelerate eviction proceedings, it would be appreciated in many corners.

I am working on it but at this point I just seem to be incurring the wrath of the "religious right". Below is an article I wrote for the SF Chronicle taking them on. It was written before Arnold was elected and I like to think his election definitely supported my Thesis:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...8/ED172871.DTL

Surprisingly, after reading my article and seeing the error of their ways, instead of turning the party over to me they shot back with articles like this:

http://www.sffaith.com/ed/articles/2003/0303gn.htm

Thus the fight continues. But I am just warming up. Now that SlaveNoMore is going to help me, they are in big trouble.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by taxwonk
Tell, Bilmore, at what point in the life cycle do we cease to have rights?

Before I answer this, let me know if you're going to have trouble with an arbitrary line qua arbitrary line.

[SlaveNoMore]

Spanky
Thus the fight continues. But I am just warming up. Now that SlaveNoMore is going to help me, they are in big trouble.

Damn their torpedoes, and full speed ahead!!!!

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
There was a controvery about Schiavo since there was a conflict about what she wanted. Delay Sr.- no controversy. That is different Ty. Can you explain all the ways?

Find me where DeLay said his concern about the Schiavo case is with making absolutely sure they respect what she would have wanted.

I'll wait here.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Find me where DeLay said his concern about the Schiavo case is with making absolutely sure they respect what she would have wanted.

I'll wait here.

Find me something that indicates that the complete uncertainty of this issue isn't driving the Schiavo saga.

Find me anything that even suggests that this would be controversial if she had filled out the form, or if family members hadn't so strongly disagreed on what she wanted, or if the initial factual determination had been the result of a fair and well-argued debate.

I'll wait here.

(ETA - Oh, like heck I will. It's past midnight.)

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by bilmore
Find me something that indicates that the complete uncertainty of this issue isn't driving the Schiavo saga.

Find me anything that even suggests that this would be controversial if she had filled out the form, or if family members hadn't so strongly disagreed on what she wanted, or if the initial factual determination had been the result of a fair and well-argued debate.

I'll wait here.

(ETA - Oh, like heck I will. It's past midnight.)

I will concede that many people reasonably doubt that Terri Schiavo would have wanted to have her feeding tube pulled in these circumstances; will you concede that Tom DeLay appears not to have been motivated by these considerations? I criticized DeLay, not everyone supporting the parents.

(And I appreciate your parallel construction, but even if I felt otherwise, what would I be searching the web for? Evidence of what would have happened if the facts had been different all along?)

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by bilmore


Find me anything that even suggests that this would be controversial if she had filled out the form,

John Ashcroft and the United States have challenged up to the Supreme Court Oregon's law that allows doctors to administer lethal doses of painkillers to terminally ill patients who wish to end their lives. If the United States is making a facial challenge to such a law, it means that the federal government takes the position that even in instances where someone expressly wants to die and has jumped through whatever stringent procedural hoops the state has established, it is still not enough.

And, no, I don't buy the distinction between administering drugs and removing a feeding tube is irrelevant for these purposes--some people will continue to make it politically controversial for someone who wants to die by anything other than "natural" causes.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I will concede that many people reasonably doubt that Terri Schiavo would have wanted to have her feeding tube pulled in these circumstances; will you concede that Tom DeLay appears not to have been motivated by these considerations?

Yep. Criticize away at Delay, but for deserved things. I think there's no lack such as would justify pulling this thing with his father into it all.

(And I appreciate your parallel construction, but even if I felt otherwise, what would I be searching the web for? Evidence of what would have happened if the facts had been different all along?)

If that's what's needed to support your simile, yes. Sort of your burden of choice.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Find me where DeLay said his concern about the Schiavo case is with making absolutely sure they respect what she would have wanted.

I'll wait here.

uhhh, Dimwit. She's braindead. We can't know what she wanted. Maybe that's what caused the reaction.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by bilmore
Yep. Criticize away at Delay, but for deserved things. I think there's no lack such as would justify pulling this thing with his father into it all.

Why not? Seems far more relevant than Bush's signing the Texas bill. This isn't simply supporting a restriction on abortion rights when your daughter had an abortion--it's his advancing legislation specific to one person to revisit a question that he and his family answered in regard to his father.

ETA: And I don't buy the line drawing that Delay's dad needed a ventilator whereas this is "just" food and water. How the mechanical administration of air is different from the mechanical administration of food/water is beyond me. Nor is the distinction between a "chance to live" any different--the evidence that Schiavo will never recover is no less overwhelming than that confronted by the Delays (who apparently didn't even wait 15 years to give dad a chance to live).

In the end, one can leave the decision to the family or one can leave the decision to the state. Delay ws happy with teh former for himself, but not for Schiavo.

[bilmore]

"Amber alert: Missing Headline

All units, all units: Be on the lookout for a headline reported missing from the mastheads of America's newspapers.

The missing headline, "130 Terrorists, Car Bomb Factory, Captured near Kerbala," was last seen in a Reuters wire report carried on an ABC news outlet in Australia.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems...3/s1332013.htm

The missing headline may be seen with the following lede:

"Two days ago, Iraqi security forces captured 130 terrorists, tons of explosives, and three fully-assembled car bombs outside the Shiite city of Kerbala."

This headline is currently missing from the archives of the New York Times' website.."

http://www.nytimes.com/pages/world/w...ext/index.html

The Times did, however, find room to run a story on a mistaken gunfight between Iraqi soldiers and police officers, which killed three.


http://iraqnow.blogspot.com/2005/03/...-headline.html

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Why not? Seems far more relevant than Bush's signing the Texas bill.

Could be, but this is simply an indication that you need to raise your threshold.

This isn't simply supporting a restriction on abortion rights when your daughter had an abortion--it's his advancing legislation specific to one person to revisit a question that he and his family answered in regard to his father.

No, apparently, (bad pun?), his father answered that for them. How come everyone likes to simply meander past this main point?

ETA: And I don't buy the line drawing that Delay's dad needed a ventilator whereas this is "just" food and water. How the mechanical administration of air is different from the mechanical administration of food/water is beyond me. Nor is the distinction between a "chance to live" any different--the evidence that Schiavo will never recover is no less overwhelming than that confronted by the Delays (who apparently didn't even wait 15 years to give dad a chance to live).

In the end, one can leave the decision to the family or one can leave the decision to the state. Delay ws happy with teh former for himself, but not for Schiavo.

Again, strawmen.