There seems a kind of contradiction between saying "this woman died years ago, there's nothing there" on the one hand, and "this woman needs to be released from her suffering" on the other. It seems to me that it is possible to argue a case for euthanasia on either head - but not on both at the same time.

"I don't think anyone who is fighting to allow this woman to die is using that as a political tool against Bush or anyone else" That may be true - but I'm not too sure that applies when it comes to the fighting by spectators, all the arguing about it by people who aren't directly involved.

The idea of a quasi-proprietorial dispute between members of a family as to who has the right to decide for one of its members is a really strange one.