>Forgive the po-faced reply to your ironic reference, Jeffrey.
>It was parenthetical; I have no brief for Sen. Frist.
>
>I did mean to repeat Nader's view of the Schiavo case, which
>seems to me correct, even in light of (reports of) the autopsy
>evidence.
>
>He pointed out that "slow death by dehydration is being
>imposed upon her under the color of law, in proceedings in
>which every benefit of the doubt -- and there are many doubts
>in this case -- has been given to her death, rather than her
>continued life ... This outrageous order proves that the
>courts are not merely permitting medical treatment to be
>withheld, it has ordered her to be made dead."
Damn, I just had a fight with someone on the WBAI producers list on this. No court ordered her death. It allowed her husband to do what spouses everywhere are and should be allowed to do - agree to the termination of life support when someone is truly hopeless, and that accords with the dying person's stated wishes. And I don't see how people who made claims for her viability aren't deeply embarrassed by the autopsy report. If you don't trust "reports of" the autopsy, the original is at <http://news.findlaw.com/nytimes/docs/schiavo/61305autopsyrpt.pdf>.
Doug