> Marta's not interested in the facts of
> the case; she's intent on repeating the antiabortion nutso talking
> points
> on this. I just don't get it.
I get it. She's speaking in the interests of an oppressed group--the disabled--and as their advocate, she's making whatever argument she can make on their behalf. Since the original trial (to the best of my knowledge) was held before the parents' got their hands on enough money to get a good original trial record, it's possible the original findings were sufficiently flawed as to not be reliable during the appeals process. Given that flaw at the beginning of the process, she thinks (I think) there's strong doubt that Terry Schiavo was actually in such bad shape as to have life support withdrawn, and given the stakes, she's taking allies wherever she can find them.
I disagree with her, but I don't find her position impossible to understand.
John A