>>Look at the "culture of life" mantra that they're enforcing last few weeks.
>
>I've thought about that phrase quite a bit. Also, the "err on the side of life" statement. Specifically in the Shiavo case, 9 seperate courts had decided there was no issue with "erring". They were convinced the woman would not have wanted to live that way. And generally, I don't recoginize this definition of "life" since it doesn't appear to include death. Sound more like an ideological fetish to me -- especially when you impose it on another. "Life" includes death...really. And when it's *your* life, it's your death too. FWIW, George & Laura have living wills.

But there was (is) a much deeper agenda here - that the courts are too powerful and consistently override the will of the people. It's REAL important that the Schiavo fuss can be remembered as yet another example of this. The fact that a majority of people thought that Congress should have stayed out of it won't matter when the arguments are resurrected later.

As it is headed now, the very organ that your founding fathers designed to protect YOUR personal liberties will have wide acclaim to have its powers curtailed to minor issues. It will be interesting to see how the tyranny of the majority works out. I know I wouldn't want to be there when that happens.

cheers