as opposed to presumptuously applying an old db statement to this current situation, i think we should let db speak for himself on this matter. and besides the obvious federal vs. states rights issues here and the GOP's characteristic lack of consistancy therewith, i think that we should stop artificially keeping her alive, since her husband has communicated her orally-given instructions. and really, good God People, shouldn't we let the Good Lord Himself decide whether or not he wishes to call her home?

ah, but i am for birth control and health care and other human forms of 'playing God', right?, so i must remain consistant. ergo, she should be artificially kept alive (even if she's totally out of it with a pathetically small chance of any recovery, which certainly appears to be the case here 15 years later) - unless she has indicated a contradictory desire. which she has, so we still arrive at the same place. as usual, folks, get it in writing!

as such, it is also no business of the gummint to decide who lives and who dies. in the case of the death penalty, a jury of peers [regular citizens] perhaps, but not empowered federal legislators; it should be well outside of their realm of influence. limited-government-advocate conservative types, where are you on this one?