Many of the posters have done a good job of answering , or at least linking to online information, that corrects much of the factual errors surrounding this case and is being passed along in the media.

My concern, however, William, is not so much with your misinformed opinion, but with your general callusness toward this situation. Amazingly, you seem to believe any concern for this woman and the inappropriate way her "husband" has mishandled her rehabilitation is misplaced judgment clouded by inordinate emotional attachment. I can only venture a guess that you have no close contact with mentally and physically disabled individuals?

Equally disturbing is how you side with the legality of the issue, rather than the morality of this issue. I find that disconcerting coming from a Bible believer who would hold to the doctrines of GRACE. Appeals to pure legality is the realm of our vast trial lawyer complex that has not only hijacked common sense, but daily oppresses the innocent, all in the name of being legal. The sheer inconsistency of a misapplied, a-moral legal system assures that terrorists will not be humilated with having panties put on their head, yet a "federal head" husband can deprive his disabled, estranged wife of basic needs all because he thinks she may had made some passing comment in the past about not being kept alive. But, she is "braindead" and unable to support herself, so anyone who happens to fall into that broad category should be subject to review of whether or not such a person has genuine quality of life. I hate to employ a cliché here, but this looks like a slippery slope.

Surely Covenant Theololgy cannot be so rigid, but I can see how falling down on the side of the alleged "rule of law" as being a logical conclusion to such views of theonomic philosophy. If disagreeing with what is such a warped understanding of law and federalism makes me schismatic, then by all means, I will remain schismatic.

Fred
www.fredsbibletalk.com

"Ah, sitting - the great leveler of men. From the mightest of pharaohs to the lowest of peasants, who doesn't enjoy a good sit?" M. Burns