Comments anyone?
Wow. Not sure what I think about this one...It's such a painfully thorny issue.
Where do the mermaids stand?
The essence of this spirit was captured in a moving speech about tolerance given last year by the student body president of one of your sister colleges. She related the story by Robert Fulghum about a young pastor who, finding himself in charge of some very energetic children, hits upon a game called "Giants, Wizards and Dwarfs." "You have to decide now," the pastor instructed the children, "which you are ... a giant, a wizard or a dwarf?"
At that, a small girl tugging at his pants leg, asked, "But where do the mermaids stand?"
The pastor told her there are no mermaids, and she says, "Oh yes there are," she said. "I am a mermaid."
Now this little girl knew what she was and she was not about to give up on either her identity or the game. She intended to take her place wherever mermaids fit into the scheme of things. Where do the mermaids stand ... All those who are different, those who do not fit the boxes and pigeonholes? "Answer that question," wrote Fulghum, "and you can build a school, a nation, or a whole world."
~~Barbara Bush
Wellesley College Commencement Address, 1990
About Me
- Monica
- One year of marriage under my belt, and it's only getting better! We've added another member to the family, a sweet and spicy lady parakeet to help keep DeWitt in line.
3 comments:
Cross reference Monkey Lung's post on The Mercied. See also Rick Garnett's post on Mirror of Justice.
If I were to offer any commentary on this, it would probably rely shamelessly on Garnett's position, since I haven't had the time (or perhaps the intellect, let alone expertise) to develop an independent opinion. Will update if any of that changes (i.e. I get whacked over the head with the "smart bat").
The moral morass can wait for another day. Since the SC made a technical ruling, I will limit my analysis to its technical merits.
Yeah, it's a tough call. It's critical to note that the SC did NOT say there was a constitional right to have this right-to-die law; it only said that the DOJ's use of a particular statute to challenge the law went beyond what the statute allowed. The statutory interp question is a close call. I might agree with the dissent, but my federalist principles would probably lead me to say that if Congress wants to ban assisted suidice, it must do so explicitly, and not have the DOJ rely on some other statute.
Well, I have no idea what you're talking about because the link is gone...but how are you doing. I should call you all sometime and see what's up. I trust everything is going alright. If you want a fill in on my life...read my blog or send me an email. my name @gmail.com. Zack, not zach...
Post a Comment