A month after its outset, Erick Munoz's battle rages on. The Texas man who has fought to get his brain-dead pregnant wife, Marlise Munoz, off life support out of respect for her wishes is now suing the hospital that's keeping Marlise on the ventilator. Not everyone agrees: On Twitter, pro-lifers are viciously condemning Munoz, praising the law that requires Munoz to be kept on life support as long as her fetus has a heartbeat.
Just in case you'd hoped Texas had grown a little more progressive.
The hospital in question claims they're trying to protect Munoz' unborn child, but medical and legal ethicists alike have argued that John Peter Smith hospital is interpreting the law too broadly and violating Marlise's rights.
A slew of editorials have come out about the case, with NBC News publishing an op-ed declaring Texas's decision as wrong. Slate's Amanda Marcotte asked for the law to be overturned completely, while CNN.com's Cynda Hylton Rushton took a more ambiguous position: "In the case of Marlise Munoz, we must consider whether keeping her alive by invoking a state law honors her and her memory."
And what does everybody else think? Well, one Patch.com poll asked readers if states should be allowed to invalidate pregnant women's advance directives. The result: So far, 65 percent have said no.
Still, others are pleased with the hospital's decision, and are attacking Munoz for wanting to take his child off life support. Brace yourself.
And outside the hospital, activists are preparing to hold a pro-life candle vigil.