The W
Views: 99057517
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Color chart | Log in for more!
20.9.07 0112
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - GOP Bill to Reinsert Schiavo Feeding Tube Signed by Bush
This thread has 4 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next(349 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (101 total)
fuelinjected
Banger
Level: 97

Posts: 2611/2679
EXP: 9157029
For next: 160329

Since: 12.10.02
From: Canada

Since last post: 3228 days
Last activity: 3228 days
#41 Posted on 22.3.05 0131.17
Reposted on: 22.3.12 0131.21
    Originally posted by AWArulz

    So, allowing someone to starve to death is OK, and even encouraged, but a painless death isn't?

    You see, everyone - this is my point. There are thousands of people out there in this woman's relative mental state. My Mother-in-Law is about 77, has Alzheimer's - end stage, cannot speak, cannot eat, cannot go to the bathroom, cannot dress, cannot do anything. She is dressed and will sit in a chair. She'll swallow if food goes in her mouth, she goes in a diaper.

    Now, if her caretakers didn't feed her, she would also starve to death. I suspect that there are a dozen more men and women in her hospice that are in the same situation.

    Is this what it comes out to? A Person says another person said that they wouldn't want to live and that life can be ended by what can only be described as torture?

    Damn. I hope not. I am not for euthinasia, but if that's gonna be ok, I vote for humane euthinasia and sophisticated barbarism rather than this more nasty and unsuportable torture.

    I am certainly not questioning anyone's motives. I have a pretty good idea about what everyone is going though. I have a problem with the end game.


Don't get me wrong, I'm not in favour of starving her to death. I would like to see her life ended in a humane way because the courts decided to uphold the husband's position.

What I'm arguing is that if you want to assist her in a less painful death, you're pretty much for assisted suicide.
Daddyblack
Weisswurst
Level: 11

Posts: 8/18
EXP: 4530
For next: 1456

Since: 30.1.05

Since last post: 3372 days
Last activity: 3356 days
#42 Posted on 22.3.05 0322.50
Reposted on: 22.3.12 0328.10
Why do conservatives always argue the "slippery slope" argument? I.E. "where does it stop?"
DrDirt
Banger
Level: 96

Posts: 1348/2698
EXP: 8862859
For next: 125960

Since: 8.10.03
From: flyover country

Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 9 hours
#43 Posted on 22.3.05 0713.29
Reposted on: 22.3.12 0714.01
    Originally posted by Daddyblack
    Why do conservatives always argue the "slippery slope" argument? I.E. "where does it stop?"


Both sides argue slippery slope. Sometimes with justification, sometimes without. The best thing to come out of all of this may be the realization on the part of all of us to get in writing what out wishes are and then a system to make sure those wishes are followed.
StaggerLee
Scrapple
Level: 140

Posts: 2358/6295
EXP: 33014283
For next: 272204

Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 10 hours
Last activity: 4 min.
#44 Posted on 22.3.05 0826.03
Reposted on: 22.3.12 0829.01
To everybody who was up in arms about the congress passing a bill and the President signing it, read this:
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/B/BRAIN_DAMAGED_WOMAN?SITE=FLPAP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT



    TAMPA, Fla. (AP) -- A federal judge on Tuesday refused to order the reinsertion of Terri Schiavo's feeding tube, denying an emergency request from the brain-damaged woman's parents that had been debated in Congress and backed by the White House.

    U.S. District Judge James Whittemore said the 41-year-old woman's parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, had not established a "substantial likelihood of success" at trial on the merits of their arguments.

    Whittemore wrote that Schiavo's "life and liberty interests" had been protected by Florida courts. Despite "these difficult and time-strained circumstances," he wrote, "this court is constrained to apply the law to the issues before it."

Can you now stop complaining about the administration simply SENDING THE MATTER BACK TO A JUDGE?
Von Maestro
Boudin rouge
Level: 47

Posts: 299/512
EXP: 724339
For next: 41870

Since: 6.1.04
From: New York

Since last post: 191 days
Last activity: 28 days
#45 Posted on 22.3.05 0830.02
Reposted on: 22.3.12 0830.07
    Originally posted by too-old-now
    I fall into the camp of supporting her wish to die, and I am outraged at the Congressional and Presidential action to bring this farther than it ever needed to be.


Ah, but this is the issue here too-old-now. "Her wish to die" is a wish that is based solely on the word of her husband, no one else. As others have said, hopefully this case will encourage people to have a living will drawn up, but the bottom line is that we do not know for sure what Terri's wishes are.

Your comments about her parents trying to "make a buck" on her death are exactly the comments I do not understand from those who support Michael Schiavo in this case!! Why in your support of Michael's wish to end Terri's life, do you vilify her family who wishes to save it??

There's just something about all of the details in this case that simply do not make sense...
DrDirt
Banger
Level: 96

Posts: 1349/2698
EXP: 8862859
For next: 125960

Since: 8.10.03
From: flyover country

Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 9 hours
#46 Posted on 22.3.05 0846.03
Reposted on: 22.3.12 0847.00
    Originally posted by Von Maestro
      Originally posted by too-old-now
      I fall into the camp of supporting her wish to die, and I am outraged at the Congressional and Presidential action to bring this farther than it ever needed to be.


    Ah, but this is the issue here too-old-now. "Her wish to die" is a wish that is based solely on the word of her husband, no one else. As others have said, hopefully this case will encourage people to have a living will drawn up, but the bottom line is that we do not know for sure what Terri's wishes are.

    Your comments about her parents trying to "make a buck" on her death are exactly the comments I do not understand from those who support Michael Schiavo in this case!! Why in your support of Michael's wish to end Terri's life, do you vilify her family who wishes to save it??

    There's just something about all of the details in this case that simply do not make sense...


But if as we are told, she has no higher brain function, she is already dead. I understand her parents not wanting to let go but after this long, it is time, although I would hope like others for a more humane death.
bash91
Merguez
Level: 55

Posts: 410/711
EXP: 1291916
For next: 22282

Since: 2.1.02
From: Plain Dealing, LA

Since last post: 765 days
Last activity: 2 hours
#47 Posted on 22.3.05 0856.44
Reposted on: 22.3.12 0859.00
    Originally posted by StaggerLee
    To everybody who was up in arms about the congress passing a bill and the President signing it ...
    Can you now stop complaining about the administration simply SENDING THE MATTER BACK TO A JUDGE?


No, and furthermore, why should we stop complaining about a Congress and a President CLEARLY acting in a stupid, partisan, and obviously unconstitutional matter? I'm quite conservative and I find it grotesque what the GOP has done. Just because a judge made the morally, ethically, and legally correct decision doesn't excuse the imbeciles who forced him into that position and intruded into someplace they should never have been nor does it mean that we should stop criticizing them for being so imbecilic. In other words, [forrest gump] Stupid is as stupid does[/forrest gump], and both the Congress and the President demonstrated that they are truly and monumentally stupid to sacrifice the core values of the party in order to make a grandstand play obviously doomed to failure.

Tim
vsp
Andouille
Level: 87

Posts: 1935/2042
EXP: 6287250
For next: 105549

Since: 3.1.02
From: Philly

Since last post: 3000 days
Last activity: 214 days
#48 Posted on 22.3.05 0903.14
Reposted on: 22.3.12 0903.14
    Originally posted by StaggerLee
    Can you now stop complaining about the administration simply SENDING THE MATTER BACK TO A JUDGE?


No, I can't. Certainly not while the whole circus is still in play, and while her parents are busy petitioning the 11th US Circuit Court to see if _they'll_ order the tube replaced and push the big Reset Button one more time.

If you can't see the abuse-of-power issues in Congress stepping in and swatting away a couple of dozen consistent court rulings they didn't like in the name of pandering to one particular religious constituency, I can't explain them well enough for you.

    Originally posted by Von Maestro
    Your comments about her parents trying to "make a buck" on her death are exactly the comments I do not understand from those who support Michael Schiavo in this case!! Why in your support of Michael's wish to end Terri's life, do you vilify her family who wishes to save it??


Because the LIFE'S NOT THERE TO SAVE. Their daughter is GONE. They're bending heaven and earth to keep a nonresponsive bag of meat "alive." It's bordering on corpse abuse.

Meanwhile, the husband (whose interpretation of his wife's wishes has been upheld _repeatedly_ by the courts, with the parents' objections duly noted and weighed at those times; it's not as if the court heard _just_ Michael's side of things at any point) is being ripped on national television by the House Majority Leader, labeled as a murderer, abuser and adulterer by talk-radio hosts nationwide, and is having his house picketed. He'll be lucky if nobody tries to assassinate him once Terri passes on; if I were him, I'd be investing heavily in Kevlar long-johns and a bulletproof Popemobile, as should Judges Greer and Whittemore. The crazies are out there.

What was his crime, worthy of such animosity? Trying to carry out what he perceived to be his DYING WIFE'S WISHES, trying to prevent her parents from keeping her twitching like a ghastly meat marionette indefinitely, and refusing to back down from a right-to-die advocacy position that's drawing 80%+ support in a lot of polls right now. Oh, and daring to offend God and Nature by dating another woman years after his WIFE HAD EFFECTIVELY DIED.

Christ on a crutch.

As for euthanasia, I agree with AWArulz (damn, THAT's a rarity in and of itself) that a more dignified means of exit should be available. If the courts could order a simple morphine drip with a steadily increasing dose, for instance, Terri would exit this world painlessly and quickly. The catch is that the same people screaming to "Let Terri 'Live'" now are the same ones who are against medical euthanasia and assisted suicide under all circumstances, even when the voters have voiced their approval.

It's not something to be considered lightly, or without significant oversight. There would be old and sick people pressured by relatives and others that "it would be for the best." There would be not-in-their-right-mind patients whose fates would be contested just as strongly as Terri Schiavo's -- even more vehemently when death could come swiftly if court rulings fall that way. There would be the ever-popular specter of someone pushing the button and saying "Wait, I changed my mind... *eggh*." Future Kevorkians shouldn't be selling Suicide Machines on eBay. Fireworks would be inevitable.

But when compared to battles like this, I'm not willing to accept that it should not be an option.
redsoxnation
Scrapple
Level: 152

Posts: 4572/7534
EXP: 43577302
For next: 724460

Since: 24.7.02

Since last post: 446 days
Last activity: 446 days
#49 Posted on 22.3.05 0911.30
Reposted on: 22.3.12 0915.10
Stagger, the judge didn't throw the case out due to it being unconstitutional, thus, the awful precedent remains. Any lawyer with a client on death row is going to use this precedent if all appeals are exhausted and start 'shopping' for a sympathetic federal judge.
Now, if Congress was creative and had attached a pay raise to this, perhaps a very loose interpretation of the 27th amendment would provide cover for this legislation.
too-old-now
Bockwurst
Level: 48

Posts: 226/545
EXP: 795409
For next: 28139

Since: 7.1.04

Since last post: 1265 days
Last activity: 190 days
#50 Posted on 22.3.05 1002.34
Reposted on: 22.3.12 1009.59
    Originally posted by Von Maestro
      Originally posted by too-old-now
      I fall into the camp of supporting her wish to die, and I am outraged at the Congressional and Presidential action to bring this farther than it ever needed to be.


    Ah, but this is the issue here too-old-now. "Her wish to die" is a wish that is based solely on the word of her husband, no one else. As others have said, hopefully this case will encourage people to have a living will drawn up, but the bottom line is that we do not know for sure what Terri's wishes are.

    Your comments about her parents trying to "make a buck" on her death are exactly the comments I do not understand from those who support Michael Schiavo in this case!! Why in your support of Michael's wish to end Terri's life, do you vilify her family who wishes to save it??

    There's just something about all of the details in this case that simply do not make sense...


The misinformation being reported in this case is astounding. Her "wish to die" was also expressed not just to her husband, but to her sister-in-law and brother-in-law at a funeral, where she told them she never wanted to be prolonged. These other family members testified in the numerous court cases that went on for the prior several years.

My "make a buck" comment had to do with the fact that her parents were no longer involved in her life until she got very sick, after the malpractise suits were filed and they wanted a piece of the settlement. Thankfully they lost as they had no basis for the claim - her husband prevailed.

Her parents should be vilified for their attacks on Michael Schiavo, but moreso for their ignoring their daughter's wishes. Their actions are consistent with someone trying to get a book or a movie deal - by trying to turn Michael Schiavo into a villian.

I find it hard to sympathize with them since their actions have not consistently been out of concern for Terri.

Bash91 and vsp, your explanations to why the Congress and Bush administration should be chastized for their actions are both right on target. Setting a precedent for federal court to intervene in a state life/death issue, just because the party didn't accept the outcome of the state courts, is not just stupid, but dangerous.
Von Maestro
Boudin rouge
Level: 47

Posts: 302/512
EXP: 724339
For next: 41870

Since: 6.1.04
From: New York

Since last post: 191 days
Last activity: 28 days
#51 Posted on 22.3.05 1043.03
Reposted on: 22.3.12 1044.33
    Originally posted by too-old-now
    The misinformation being reported in this case is astounding. Her "wish to die" was also expressed not just to her husband, but to her sister-in-law and brother-in-law at a funeral, where she told them she never wanted to be prolonged. These other family members testified in the numerous court cases that went on for the prior several years.

    My "make a buck" comment had to do with the fact that her parents were no longer involved in her life until she got very sick, after the malpractise suits were filed and they wanted a piece of the settlement. Thankfully they lost as they had no basis for the claim - her husband prevailed.

    Her parents should be vilified for their attacks on Michael Schiavo, but moreso for their ignoring their daughter's wishes. Their actions are consistent with someone trying to get a book or a movie deal - by trying to turn Michael Schiavo into a villian.


Oh, pardon me, the only word of her wishes are from Michael & HIS family members. That obviously changes everything & shows zero bias in Michael's favor & against the Shindlers...

The misinformation in this case is amazing & it goes both ways. Michael Schiavo has challenged President Bush to come see Terri & decide for himself. Why was this challenge not offered to the Judge Greer who made his rulings without ever having seen Terri? Why has $400k of Terri's settlement gone to pay for Michael's legal fees & not for Terri's rehab? The questions on motives go both ways, so lets not try to paint one side as the villian or savior over the other.

There are a ton of issues in this case, & while congress totally overstepped their bounds, I'm not as comfortable with simply ending this woman's life on the word of this man as many here seem to be...
jfkfc
Liverwurst
Level: 69

Posts: 547/1177
EXP: 2740212
For next: 129546

Since: 9.2.02

Since last post: 65 days
Last activity: 2 days
#52 Posted on 22.3.05 1220.46
Reposted on: 22.3.12 1221.40
    Originally posted by Von Maestro
    Oh, pardon me, the only word of her wishes are from Michael & HIS family members. That obviously changes everything & shows zero bias in Michael's favor & against the Shindlers...

    The misinformation in this case is amazing & it goes both ways. Michael Schiavo has challenged President Bush to come see Terri & decide for himself. Why was this challenge not offered to the Judge Greer who made his rulings without ever having seen Terri? Why has $400k of Terri's settlement gone to pay for Michael's legal fees & not for Terri's rehab? The questions on motives go both ways, so lets not try to paint one side as the villian or savior over the other.

    There are a ton of issues in this case, & while congress totally overstepped their bounds, I'm not as comfortable with simply ending this woman's life on the word of this man as many here seem to be...
What has given you the impression that she did not convey this to her husband that makes "the word of this man" so dubious? Is there record of them being unhappily married? Is there any reason at all to believe that he made it up from the beginning? I am not sure why it is so hard to believe that she told her spouse, and didn't happen to share the information with the rest of her family. Personally, my wife knows my wishes and my family doesn't, so maybe it just sits easier with me, I suppose.

In regards to the $400K not going to her rehab...I could see it as questionable if he took a stable of chicks to the Caymans for a month with the money, but as a spouse, it IS his money, and it seems that he has a HUGE amount of legal bills stemming from this whole mess....
Leroy
Boudin blanc
Level: 91

Posts: 514/2263
EXP: 7307397
For next: 161544

Since: 7.2.02

Since last post: 4 days
Last activity: 1 day
#53 Posted on 22.3.05 1226.49
Reposted on: 22.3.12 1228.03
    Originally posted by vsp
    The catch is that the same people screaming to "Let Terri 'Live'" now are the same ones who are against medical euthanasia and assisted suicide under all circumstances, even when the voters have voiced their approval.


They're also against stem cell research... try to wrap your head around that one.

Personally, I'm not a proponent of euthanasia. People like Mark O'Brien - who spent most of his life in an iron lung - live very productive lives in spite of the most horrific of crippling illnesses.

But I'm not a opponent,either. And in a case like this, where there's no cognitive function and where the medical evidence overwelmingly points to no chance of any recovery, there's no purpose in keeping her alive (except to make her a political pawn - so there you go).

(edited by Leroy on 22.3.05 1027)
CarlCX
Salami
Level: 33

Posts: 129/219
EXP: 217993
For next: 11189

Since: 1.5.02
From: California.

Since last post: 10 days
Last activity: 4 days
AIM:  
#54 Posted on 22.3.05 1237.33
Reposted on: 22.3.12 1237.41
    Originally posted by Von Maestro

    Oh, pardon me, the only word of her wishes are from Michael & HIS family members. That obviously changes everything & shows zero bias in Michael's favor & against the Shindlers...

    The misinformation in this case is amazing & it goes both ways. Michael Schiavo has challenged President Bush to come see Terri & decide for himself. Why was this challenge not offered to the Judge Greer who made his rulings without ever having seen Terri? Why has $400k of Terri's settlement gone to pay for Michael's legal fees & not for Terri's rehab? The questions on motives go both ways, so lets not try to paint one side as the villian or savior over the other.

    There are a ton of issues in this case, & while congress totally overstepped their bounds, I'm not as comfortable with simply ending this woman's life on the word of this man as many here seem to be...


The challenge was made to Bush and not Greer because between the two of them, Bush was the one agreeing that she was a capable human being with an obvious chance of recovery, mayhaps?

Allow me to quote myself, by the way:

    Originally posted by CarlCX
    When Michael Schiavo won the malpractice suit in 1993--$1 million, $700,000 of which went to Terri--they demanded a share, and it was only once he refused that they sought to remove him as guardian-at-litem. They testified in court that they didn't know what Terri's wishes were, but even if they did, they would still take action against letting her go.


$300,000 of the money he earned went to himself because the cost of flying Terri to California for said rehab, which included paying for experimental freakin' brain surgery, cost $700,000. Are you seriously going to call him neglectful because he only used a measly 7/10 of the settlement, disregarding that that was all it cost? Should he have thrown yet MORE Money at her despite the fact that every doctor who worked with her, including the doctor in charge of the rehab, told him that she had no chance of recovery?

You want to know why we're siding with Michael Schiavo instead of the Schindlers? Here's a little tidbit from the Wolfson report that explains it fairly well:

    Originally posted by The Wolfson Report
    Testimony provided by members of the Schindler family included very personal statements about their desire and intention to ensure that Theresa remain alive. Throughout the course of the litigation, deposition and trial testimony by members of the Schindler family voiced the disturbing belief that they would keep Theresa alive at any and all costs. Nearly gruesome examples were given, eliciting agreement by family members that in the event Theresa should contract diabetes and subsequent gangrene in each of her limbs, they would agree to amputate each limb, and would then, were she to be diagnosed with heart disease, perform open heart surgery. There was additional, difficult testimony that appeared to establish that despite the sad and undesirable condition of Theresa, the parents still derived joy from having her alive, even if Theresa might not be at all aware of her environment given the persistent vegetative state. Within the testimony, as part of the hypotheticals presented, Schindler family members stated that even if Theresa had told them of her intention to have artificial nutrition withdrawn, they would not do it.


Does that sound like the point of view of a group that should be left in charge of this woman's life, or lack thereof?

edit: removed obnoxious double-quote

(edited by CarlCX on 22.3.05 1044)
DrDirt
Banger
Level: 96

Posts: 1352/2698
EXP: 8862859
For next: 125960

Since: 8.10.03
From: flyover country

Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 9 hours
#55 Posted on 22.3.05 1238.55
Reposted on: 22.3.12 1239.10
    Originally posted by Leroy
      Originally posted by vsp
      The catch is that the same people screaming to "Let Terri 'Live'" now are the same ones who are against medical euthanasia and assisted suicide under all circumstances, even when the voters have voiced their approval.


    They're also against stem cell research... try to wrap your head around that one.

    Personally, I'm not a proponent of euthanasia. People like Mark O'Brien - who spent most of his life in an iron lung - live very productive lives in spite of the most horrific of crippling illnesses.

    But I'm not a opponent,either. And in a case like this, where there's no cognitive function and where the medical evidence overwelmingly points to no chance of any recovery, there's no purpose in keeping her alive (except to make her a political pawn - so there you go).

    (edited by Leroy on 22.3.05 1027)


Leroy, I am in the same boat you are. The real pickle here is the tendency of extremist politicians to view things in black and white when many dilemas in life are a shade of gray. Perhaps the overridding problem is that our emotional development and philosophies as a society haven't caught up to our tecnology and science.
Von Maestro
Boudin rouge
Level: 47

Posts: 303/512
EXP: 724339
For next: 41870

Since: 6.1.04
From: New York

Since last post: 191 days
Last activity: 28 days
#56 Posted on 22.3.05 1246.09
Reposted on: 22.3.12 1248.25
    Originally posted by jfkfc
    What has given you the impression that she did not convey this to her husband that makes "the word of this man" so dubious?


I guess the fact that he did not make her wishes known until seven years after her condition began, when he had already begun a relationship & family with another woman, makes me somewhat skeptical of simply taking him on his word in this matter.

    Originally posted by jfkfc
    In regards to the $400K not going to her rehab...I could see it as questionable if he took a stable of chicks to the Caymans for a month with the money, but as a spouse, it IS his money, and it seems that he has a HUGE amount of legal bills stemming from this whole mess....


That's weak jfkfc. The money was a malpractice settlement for Terri & was meant to be used for her rehab, not for a legal battle to kill her. It just seems odd that a man who claims to have her best interest at heart would not even make an attempt to have an aggressive rehab program implemented with at least SOME of that money.

As I've said before, the whole situation just feels off to me & I'm just not comfortable with starving this woman to death on the word of this man. My opinion is known & I'll leave this issue to the rest of you guys, & watch my rating continue to plummet due to my seemingly unpopular stance on this subject... :-/

Edit: One last thing to CarlCX. The settlement was for more than $1 Million, & immediately after receiving the settlement he ceased rehab for Terri & began this whole process. Something just stinks about all of this...

(edited by Von Maestro on 22.3.05 1155)
CarlCX
Salami
Level: 33

Posts: 130/219
EXP: 217993
For next: 11189

Since: 1.5.02
From: California.

Since last post: 10 days
Last activity: 4 days
AIM:  
#57 Posted on 22.3.05 1255.23
Reposted on: 22.3.12 1255.25
    Originally posted by Von Maestro
    One more thing..


Oh, sure, post right after I make my witty and amazing response. What's your source on the settlement's size and his immediately ending the rehab?

(edited by CarlCX on 22.3.05 1057)
CRZ
Big Brother
Administrator
Level: 213

Posts: 5951/16220
EXP: 141126405
For next: 2240502

Since: 9.12.01
From: ミネアポリス

Since last post: 9 hours
Last activity: 9 hours
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#58 Posted on 22.3.05 1313.12
Reposted on: 22.3.12 1329.02
Those of you who have made SIX posts in this thread - and I count four of you at this stage - MAY wish to consider the possibility that you're repeating yourselves and we get it. (Note I'm not telling you to stop...yet. Just, you know, don't stoop to quoting BLOGS or somethin')
oldschoolhero
Knackwurst
Level: 104

Posts: 2038/3059
EXP: 11529252
For next: 332913

Since: 2.1.02
From: nWo Country

Since last post: 1953 days
Last activity: 1887 days
#59 Posted on 22.3.05 1318.18
Reposted on: 22.3.12 1329.03
"I guess the fact that he did not make her wishes known until seven years after her condition began, when he had already begun a relationship & family with another woman, makes me somewhat skeptical of simply taking him on his word in this matter."

So he spent seven years trying to cure her, refusing to close the door on her, then met someone else and finally decided to let her go? The guy fell in love with this woman. Even if he knew that she had wanted to die, maybe he couldn't bring himself to do it. Maybe finding love again was the catalyst for him finally admitting to himself th Terri was gone and wasn't coming back.

Or whatever. Point is, making judgements on the mental workings behind a man's decision to let his wife die in peace, when you know nothing about their lives behind closed doors, is low. It's one thing for the Schindlers, obnoxious and underhanded though they may be, to do so, it's entirely another for those with no connection to the family to make such statements based on the tidbits that they recieve through the media. The ruling was made that Terri should be allowed to die, and Bush and congress stepped in and undermined the entire process in order to make a pseudo-religious political statement. That is the issue here, not Michael Schiavo's motivations.
AWArulz
Knackwurst
Level: 108

Posts: 1089/3370
EXP: 13293676
For next: 226867

Since: 28.1.02
From: Louisville, KY

Since last post: 36 min.
Last activity: 32 min.
AIM:  
Y!:
#60 Posted on 22.3.05 1337.04
Reposted on: 22.3.12 1337.04
    Originally posted by too-old-now
    Who would keep feeding a dog that cannot interract with its environment? It would be "inhumane".


Everyone. You would too. Is there one person here that would just stop feeding an old dog and let it die? I wouldn't. I'd take it to the vet and have it put down and hold the damn old dog in my lap until it stopped breathing.

But this isn't a dog. It's a person, (or as someone called Terri "A Piece of meat") and we can treat her any way we want.

This'll be my last post in the thread. I'm sorry I got involved in it at all. I just don't understand some of the logic and hate for the parents of this woman. Don't you see what they're going through?
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 NextThread ahead: Last Rites given to Pope John Paul II
Next thread: Sandy Beger to Plead Guilty Today
Previous thread: Some Pharmacists Refuse to Fill Birth Control Prescriptions
(349 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - GOP Bill to Reinsert Schiavo Feeding Tube Signed by BushRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board - 7 year recycle

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim
This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.218 seconds.