Last post of the afternoon: I can understand a judge deciding to let Terri Schiavo live. In our fallen world, I can understand a judge deciding that Terri's husband can get the medical establishment to kill her. But what I can't understand is why a judge would give permission to kill her in three weeks. If I understand the ruling correctly (and I haven't read the text), the judge is conceding that Terri is medically dead already, so why wait three weeks? Not only is the decision wrong, it doesn't even make logical sense.
Is it possible that the judge is trying to craft an exit strategy that gets him off the hook of collaborating in a judicially-sanctioned murder?
If he has any decency left in him, no doubt he's thinking about his legacy...
I think that the judge gave three weeks in order to give the other side time to pick apart his reasoning, his argument, and turn things around, either with him or with another judge. It's pretty common for these delays to occur because judges rarely want to short circuit appeals and insist on becoming the final word.
The judge gave three weeks in order to give fair judicial opportunity for Terri's parents to file appeals, as is allowed by law. Thus, putting it into another judge's lap. Par for the course. I agree with you, why not kill her now. Literally. I see no logic in pulling the tube and waiting two weeks. Jack Kevorkian is in prison for doing quickly and mercifully what these doctors are legally allowed to do slowly and painfully. They pretend they are not really killing her when the tube is pulled, as if it may possibly result in life. Jack did not indulge is such fantasies. Why do we? Kill her now.