You know we could argue this all day and night and all year. I only know what I have heard and read (the court records and affadavits) and you only know what you heard and read. No one is intentionally lying.
My only point was that there are far too many unanswered questions, particularly about the "husband."
Of course there is history and custom and even law of the spouse having guardianship and decisionmaking. But, when does a spouse no longer become a spouse - having a common law wife with children? Yes, you may say a divorce is the only thing that would preclude it, but Terri had not choice in that either.
Based on What I've heard from her friends and from some of the people that took care of her, if she would have regained consciousness she would have said, "Get that dirtbag out of my life" even before she would have said "Let me live (or let me die)."
I said three years, outofdafog, because that is unquestionably well documented and undisputed in the record. It appears to me that Michael Schiavo put his whole heart and soul into treatment and therapy for almost 4 years, then slowly accepted the idea that there was no realistic hope. If we presume that the guy is a relatively normal human being, with a heart, and extend to him just the tiniest bit of benefit of doubt, his actions seem pretty normal and understandable, to me at least.
He aggresively pursues treatment for a few years. During that time, because he doesn't know the liklihood of success, he doesn't know what Terri's wishes would be. He slowly becomes convinced that there is no hope. Given that conclusion, he then knows (believes, if you prefer) that she would not wish to be kept alive. He likely spends some time wrestling with the difficult decision to halt life-prolonging measures before finally making the decision to do it. He knows that her parents will contest the decision, so he petitions the court to determine Terri's wishes. During the protracted legal battle and resulting public spectacle, he tries to keep himself and Terri out of the spotlight as much as possible.
I can't say for sure that the above paragraph accurately portrays Michael Schiavo, but I can easily see myself feeling and acting that way in such a scenario.
I don't want to force anyone to do anything, but what is wrong (regardless if you are religious or atheist) with a society that wants or has morals. Are morals a bad thing now??
Morals are not bad, however there are certain elements such as Jerry Falwell which are turning their twisted view of Christianity into an American Taliban, and trying to impose their will on our nation.
There is nothing wrong with Christianity, and I defend it's followers even though I don't believe in it at all. However, when people start to try to force their religion on me or others, I get angry. This whole Schiavo situation became an excuse for those that want to live under an American Taliban-like government to try to impose their beliefs on everyone else.
I said three years, outofdafog, because that is unquestionably well documented and undisputed in the record. It appears to me that Michael Schiavo put his whole heart and soul into treatment and therapy for almost 4 years, then slowly accepted the idea that there was no realistic hope. If we presume that the guy is a relatively normal human being, with a heart, and extend to him just the tiniest bit of benefit of doubt, his actions seem pretty normal and understandable, to me at least.
Also for those who don't know what that record is, it includes things such as:
Michael Schiavo taking her to California for experimental treatments since normal medical science was unable to help her.
Michael Schiavo getting an education in nursing so he would be able to care for her properly.
Putting most of the malpractice lawsuit money that he got into a trust fund for her healthcare.
Waking up every day to dress her, put makeup on her, and spending time with her.
Even though they fought each other for years, inviting the parents to be in the room with her out of respect of the fact that they are her family too.
Michael Schiavo was nearly a saint when it came to taking care of his wife, and once he learned of the impossibility of her recovery, he appears to have done what any decent person would do, which is to carry out what he felt his wife would have wanted. You and I don't know for sure, but given the great care, concern, and sacrifices he made for her, I have no question about his motives. My wife told me that she would not want to have her body kept alive if she were in Terri Schiavo's condition. I'd be willing to go further and risk prison for injecting her with something to help her OD peacefully if I had to. I love my wife enough that I would do whatever is necessary with no regard for myself to care for her, even if it meant to end her suffering. I hope I never have to be in a situation like Michael Schiavo, but I think he is a good man for all of the love and care he put into taking care of Terri Schiavo.
As to his relationship with another woman, I don't see why Christians are getting upset about that, since it was common in biblical times to have multiple wives. Without being in a situation like he is in, it's not possible for people like us on this site to judge his motives or alliances. When you are a parent, do you abandon your first child upon the birth of the second child? If you have three or more kids, do you only care about the youngest and let the oldest go off into the world and suffer? People are capable of loving in many ways, so I see no reason to question Michael Schiavo's claims that he loved Terri. I'm not in his shoes, so I can't really judge him.
Well yeah, Pee-Mosh. I guess she was becoming quite the pain in the a$$. It really was best just to kill her...
And, now that she is dead, there is no hope. Why was it such a terrible crime to allow her to live at the hands of her parents taking over the hospice care, and allowing them to hope? Do you have kids? Do you love 'em? Ever lose one or think about losing one?
I think what has bothered us as Americans the most about this ordeal with Terri's death isn't the battle between her husband and family or agreeing that the state she was in wasn't really "living", BUT the fact that all it took to pull the plug, so to speak, was the simple removal of a feeding tube.
It certainly seems barbaric enough - I mean, who would intentionally starve themselves to death in two weeks to commit suicide? In this country we have to, by law, protect and feed our children, right? If we don't we are not good parents - we'll go to jail! Same goes with our pets. So, how do we justify the removal of a feeding tube - the only "life support" this woman had - as a way to provide her with her last wishes? It sounds horrific, yet it is done every day in hospices, hospitals and even at-home deaths. Although this has been done for years it does not seem like a "humane" way to end a life.
So...
I think the bigger issue, really, is that America needs to better define the "humane" way to the end life and consider better care and comfort measures for terminal patients - and especially euthanisia.
This is a funny country we live in. Americans will talk about sex on prime-time TV, watch people eat god-knows-what on reality shows, but still have our heads in the sand about death... and we have the biggest generation ever of Americans hitting the elder-stages of life... God help us.
(I will now don my flack jacket and helmet because I'm sure the fur will fly...)
Don't y'all get tired of being told what to care about, what to be "up in arms" about, what to get your evangelical dander up about by the likes of Robertson and Dobson.
This case became a darling in the eyes of the media because of it's inherent intrigue. (Starvation and dehydration as opposed to the kidney failure and cardiac arrest that might arise by unplugging a machine)
Yes, by gosh, it's tragic...but people are pulled off of artificial life support every day...my grandfather was taken off of a respirator but the whole country didn't talk about it for two weeks.
I have enough ethical dilemma and problem solving to keep me busy in Indiana without being manipulated by opportunists like Dobson and Robertson to act like I really, really, really, really care about some girl in FL whom I never met.
She wasn't on a respirator. She wasn't on any life support machines. They took away her food and water and killed her. That is a cruel way to murder someone...
I agree. No Water/food is a bad, bad way to go. Yet the same “court” systems approve that we give sedatives to death row inmates BEFORE they get a lethal injection. For humane purposes.
The courts decided to kill her… in a harmless way... it MUST happen “naturally”. (I thik I am about to hurl)
The courts, like our representatives, are supposed to be a reflection of US - we the people. This is our country… not theirs.
Death, like life, is deeply personal. Or, at least I think should be.
Seems as though we are saying that any time ANY life is in the balance... Judges ONLY get to decide… when and if, there is ANY conflict.
(And by the way, my Dad passed many years ago - cancer. He was young. It went fast. He suffered. I wept. We all tried. Everything. He died. But ... NO COURTS decided his fate. If they had…. I would be in DEEP conflict, today)
If the idea of courts is to end conflict… AND THAT IS THE IDEA OF COURTS
I think they just started a whole bunch of it. They resolved nothing. They inflamed the difficult.
Why have none of the great christian leaders who are up in arms about this mentioned that both Adam and Jesus Christ said,
"Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh." Genesis 2:24 - Adam
"For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh." Matthew 19:5 - Jesus, the second Adam.
Both of those men, according to God, were spokesmen for the entire human race.
Yet I don't hear Christians shouting, or see them marching with THAT on their signs.
I'm not thinking that Terri's condition meets the Biblical conditions for Michael Schiavo to divorce her either.
Had he divorced her because of her condition he'd be branded a jerk for that too.
Hmmm. Money & sex. The two biggest things that drive TV just happen to be woven into this issue too. Now there's death. Let's take bets as to which network puts out the first miniseries on it & when.
As harsh as it may sound, Terri's father gave his dughter to Michael when he married her. Terri LEFT father and mother to be one with Michael.
Of course this is a horrible situation. Horrible for Terri, whose death releases her from the bondage of her malfunctioning body.
Again. I don't hear the great Christian leaders soapboxing before millions of how her next moment of consciousness is:
"...the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first..."
She's getting a new body that is unquestionably "alert and responsive."
I've heard them say, "appalling," and "shameful" referring to Michael Schiavo. He's after money! people shout. The website "terrisfight.org" the online home of the Terri Schindler-Schiavo Foundation has links in this order;
All of the judges, all the way up to our supreme court, are idiots. They can't read, they don't care about Terri, they care more that her jerk of a husband gets HIS way than her loving mother, HERS. They are more concerned with being "activist" than they are with judicial order and rule of law.
They're just plan mean.
Murderers, all of 'em.
Right?
Terri Schiavo's death is no more senseless than the 1500+ Americans who've died in IRAQ. Some of them have had THEIR bodies ripped to pieces by explosive devices or bullets.
What about the thousands who lost their lives on the beach at Normandy where there was so much blood the waves were red with it.
The tragedy here in my opinion is that this poor woman was forced to live 15 years in this persistent, yet not really, vegetative state. Aware of the tube in her throat. Aware of the bed sores, aware that she can see but can't move with any real semblance of control, can't speak, can't function as a human, her body reduced to little more than an organic machine, that she, once pretty and "vital" was trapped in.
We don't know for sure but can guess that yes, she really wanted to live like that.
I know I wouldn't and DON'T. This life just doesn't mean enough to me to live it confined to a bed as she.
I've never worked in a hospice. I've only visited a couple of nursing homes on a few occasions. I do know that both my Mother and my Father both had something goin on between them and God concerning their deaths that God didn't let the rest of my family in on.
They were both "strangely aware" of their impending deaths. God took care of them. I'm sure he took care of Terri too.
1) Nobody "murdered" her. They just let her die. Before that they were forcing her to live; if they'd just let her lie down in a bed she'd have died long ago. If someone should be kept alive for that much time, then there needs to be consent on the part of whoever is paying the bills and sacrificing their time/life.
2) The reason those people say they are outraged is because they want to reverse Roe vs Wade through the 'back door'.
Well yeah, Pee-Mosh. I guess she was becoming quite the pain in the a$$. It really was best just to kill her...
Do you always resort to spelling names in an insulting manner when you know you are wrong?
quote:
Originally posted by Jonny Lingo:
And, now that she is dead, there is no hope. Why was it such a terrible crime to allow her to live at the hands of her parents taking over the hospice care, and allowing them to hope? Do you have kids? Do you love 'em? Ever lose one or think about losing one?
I have a wife, and I love her, and would not keep her body alive like Terri Schiavo's was, especially when my wife has told me throughout this whole thing that she would not want to live like that. My wife believes that when you die, you go to heaven/hell and so to be dead in the mind but have your body kept alive unnaturally like Terri Schiavo was, is torture. Not only that, but there was 0% chance of her recovering. She couldn't grow a new brain to be able to live.
So in response to your insulting question, I ask you. Do you love your wife? Would you keep her body alive unnaturally after her mind had died just so you don't have to face reality? I understand and I feel sorry for Terri's parents as well as her husband and the rest of her family. They all suffered, and I can empathize with all of them. However, the pity I have for the Schindlers does not mean that I agree with them, and it does not mean that I do not think that they were delusional.
I agree. No Water/food is a bad, bad way to go. Yet the same “court” systems approve that we give sedatives to death row inmates BEFORE they get a lethal injection. For humane purposes.
That has nothing to do with Terri Schiavo though. Macaroni Grill gives you bread and an oil dipping sauce before they serve you your food. It is barbaric that they do not give this to death row inmates.
quote:
Originally posted by Too Gray Now:
The courts decided to kill her… in a harmless way... it MUST happen “naturally”. (I thik I am about to hurl)
You are completely wrong, and if you can't even grasp this basic concept, then you understand nothing about this case. Michael Schiavo carried out what he felt were the wishes of his wife. He brought it to the courts because he felt that it would bring about an end to the conflict between him and the parents so that experts could take a look and help them decide.
quote:
Originally posted by Too Gray Now:
The courts, like our representatives, are supposed to be a reflection of US - we the people. This is our country… not theirs.
No, they are Americans just like you or I, and they ruled in favor of what was right. Just because you and maybe 3% of the nation wanted to keep her body alive unnaturally doesn't mean that you speak for the American people. If you don't want to abide by the laws of our country, you are free to convince the rest of us that you are right and that we should change our laws. If you want to sit back and talk about how we should turn the nation into a theocracy based on American Taliban beliefs like Pat Robertson's opinion, there are plenty of nations in the middle east that might be a little more appropriate for you.
quote:
Originally posted by Too Gray Now:
Death, like life, is deeply personal. Or, at least I think should be.
Seems as though we are saying that any time ANY life is in the balance... Judges ONLY get to decide… when and if, there is ANY conflict.
Then why are you trying to butt in with the personal lives of the Schiavos and Schindlers? Why do you want to pass laws that interfere with people's choice for life and death, or the rights of the family to decide whether or not to continue life support?
quote:
Originally posted by Too Gray Now:
If the idea of courts is to end conflict… AND THAT IS THE IDEA OF COURTS
The only reason they failed here is because overzealous religious politicians encouraged the mental illnesses of the Schindlers and tried to take advantage of it to force our nation to adopt their religious beliefs as law, and especially tried to use this as a backdoor to end legal and safe abortion, as johniam pointed out.
quote:
Originally posted by Too Gray Now:
I think they just started a whole bunch of it. They resolved nothing. They inflamed the difficult.
"They" meaning the media and religious leaders, since they are the ones that inflamed this and turned it into a media circus.
Sorry about the "We" statement. I was upset and it was meant to be a collective term regarding our country. The US has made so many compromises on what our forefathers fought to maintain; that life and freedom was sacred.
When there is no written declaration , I believe we should err on the side of life. I have a relative who is brain damaged and lives in an institution, who responds slowly and crudely like Terri, yet he does respond. I could see her response in those tapes. The brain is an area that we humans just don't understand, regardless of all our technology and our supposed wisdom.
If the parents were willing to go visit everyday for 15 years, what was it to Terri's husband?? Let them have their daughter for what remaining years they have on this earth. The hardest thing for a mother to do is to watch her baby suffer pain and hunger when she knows how to help. It's an instinctual and overwhelming drive to feed them. On the other hand, I believe that if euthanasia is going to be an option, then starvation should NOT be the method.
A lot of us flippantly state we wouldn't want to live incapacitated, but when the hour comes, a lot of us would likely change our mind. It happens all the time. Christopher Reeve always said that, and initially wanted his life support removed. But then he changed his mind and fought hard for 10 years, all the while enjoying his family as best he could. He was on more life support than Mrs Schiavo.
The courts, like our representatives, are supposed to be a reflection of US - we the people. This is our country… not theirs.
I thought even judges could be Americans. Seriously, if we accept your statement, then what's your problem? Polls show that most people agree with what was done and oppose Congress and Bush sticking their noses into Florida's business, so the courts actually were a reflection of "we the people" in this case.
If we're going to talk about, well, Michael is the husband, his word should be obeyed - please, that doesn't wash - not in this situation.
In this case, I do not think Michael lived up to his wedding vows at all. He forgot the "in sickness" and in health part, the until death do us part section. He would bring his girlfriend along with him to visit Terri. He has a common law wife and two children. He's not great principled guy. He forfeited any right to decide she should die.
As for everyone talking about how great the "law" is, and the "judges" are. America's dirty little secret is that every judge who is elected, almost all of his contributions come from lawyers. The lawyers own the judges in this country - not the people. Come election time, we have every single judge running for something or other traipsing through our offices, and the lawyers are told to give (of course, the firm reimburses them). If people knew this, they'd be up in arms. This makes for very partial judgment, when the lawyer standing in front of the Judge gave him $10,000 to be there.
Most of you were telling a different story when the Supreme Court gave Bush the election. Where was all your respect, reverance and awe for the law then? Don't be such hypocrites.
I think the reason this case has drawn so much attention is one word: doubt.
I have great doubt about Michael, 7 years later, suddenly remembering, he had this conversation with his wife, when others who knew her, even discussing a similar situation, said she disapproved. I think Michael lied. I think Michael decided it was time for her to go so he could "move on" - with a little extra money in his pocket, of course.
Just because he was the husband, so what! How many husbands have never erred. He abdicated his rights to her when he broke his wedding vows, entered into another relationship with a woman and had her children.
Now people are defending polygamy? ok, whatever. If a woman decided to take on another husband while married to you men here, I bet you'd be up in arms.
Do you always resort to spelling names in an insulting manner when you know you are wrong?
No P. I don't always resort to spelling names in an insulting manner. You would not believe how many times I have refrained from calling you that. This was the first time. Couldn't resist, sorry. In this case, your impudence just seemed to warrent it.
And no, I didn't resort to it "because I know I am wrong" as you say. I only resorted to it because your arrogance irks me so. But yes, resort to it I did, sorry. This is a very hot and emotional issue I suppose, and I am not on your side of the thinking...
And by the way, does this mean that everyone here who refers to VPW as "Vee Pee" is wrong?
But yeah,..kill her... great choice...And if it happens to one of your children down the road, should you father any, then at that time consider what you would do then.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
5
7
7
8
Popular Days
Mar 31
41
Apr 1
22
Apr 2
11
Apr 5
8
Top Posters In This Topic
HCW 5 posts
waterbuffalo 7 posts
Mister P-Mosh 7 posts
J0nny Ling0 8 posts
Popular Days
Mar 31 2005
41 posts
Apr 1 2005
22 posts
Apr 2 2005
11 posts
Apr 5 2005
8 posts
outofdafog
Actually 7 years long-gone
Interesting article: The roots of spouse being decision maker deeply rooted in the bible.
www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/03/29/shaivo.law.ap/index.html
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TaylorCompany
Long Gone,
You know we could argue this all day and night and all year. I only know what I have heard and read (the court records and affadavits) and you only know what you heard and read. No one is intentionally lying.
My only point was that there are far too many unanswered questions, particularly about the "husband."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
LG isn't saying that you or anyone here is intentionally lying. He's saying that whoever originated that information was intentionally lying.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TaylorCompany
Outofdafog,
Of course there is history and custom and even law of the spouse having guardianship and decisionmaking. But, when does a spouse no longer become a spouse - having a common law wife with children? Yes, you may say a divorce is the only thing that would preclude it, but Terri had not choice in that either.
Based on What I've heard from her friends and from some of the people that took care of her, if she would have regained consciousness she would have said, "Get that dirtbag out of my life" even before she would have said "Let me live (or let me die)."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Shellon
I am forever ashamed and shocked at how so many people know what another wants, yet were not there, didn't have the conversation.
Before my husband died, he was the only person on the planet that knew me and what I wanted, cuz I told him.
I'd be willing to bet that this woman and her husband had a conversation of three during their marriage.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LG
I said three years, outofdafog, because that is unquestionably well documented and undisputed in the record. It appears to me that Michael Schiavo put his whole heart and soul into treatment and therapy for almost 4 years, then slowly accepted the idea that there was no realistic hope. If we presume that the guy is a relatively normal human being, with a heart, and extend to him just the tiniest bit of benefit of doubt, his actions seem pretty normal and understandable, to me at least.
He aggresively pursues treatment for a few years. During that time, because he doesn't know the liklihood of success, he doesn't know what Terri's wishes would be. He slowly becomes convinced that there is no hope. Given that conclusion, he then knows (believes, if you prefer) that she would not wish to be kept alive. He likely spends some time wrestling with the difficult decision to halt life-prolonging measures before finally making the decision to do it. He knows that her parents will contest the decision, so he petitions the court to determine Terri's wishes. During the protracted legal battle and resulting public spectacle, he tries to keep himself and Terri out of the spotlight as much as possible.
I can't say for sure that the above paragraph accurately portrays Michael Schiavo, but I can easily see myself feeling and acting that way in such a scenario.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
i want to say one thing only....
the PFAL class (green card claims) did not teach me how to separate truth from error....
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mister P-Mosh
Morals are not bad, however there are certain elements such as Jerry Falwell which are turning their twisted view of Christianity into an American Taliban, and trying to impose their will on our nation.
There is nothing wrong with Christianity, and I defend it's followers even though I don't believe in it at all. However, when people start to try to force their religion on me or others, I get angry. This whole Schiavo situation became an excuse for those that want to live under an American Taliban-like government to try to impose their beliefs on everyone else.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mister P-Mosh
Also for those who don't know what that record is, it includes things such as:
Michael Schiavo was nearly a saint when it came to taking care of his wife, and once he learned of the impossibility of her recovery, he appears to have done what any decent person would do, which is to carry out what he felt his wife would have wanted. You and I don't know for sure, but given the great care, concern, and sacrifices he made for her, I have no question about his motives. My wife told me that she would not want to have her body kept alive if she were in Terri Schiavo's condition. I'd be willing to go further and risk prison for injecting her with something to help her OD peacefully if I had to. I love my wife enough that I would do whatever is necessary with no regard for myself to care for her, even if it meant to end her suffering. I hope I never have to be in a situation like Michael Schiavo, but I think he is a good man for all of the love and care he put into taking care of Terri Schiavo.
As to his relationship with another woman, I don't see why Christians are getting upset about that, since it was common in biblical times to have multiple wives. Without being in a situation like he is in, it's not possible for people like us on this site to judge his motives or alliances. When you are a parent, do you abandon your first child upon the birth of the second child? If you have three or more kids, do you only care about the youngest and let the oldest go off into the world and suffer? People are capable of loving in many ways, so I see no reason to question Michael Schiavo's claims that he loved Terri. I'm not in his shoes, so I can't really judge him.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
J0nny Ling0
Well yeah, Pee-Mosh. I guess she was becoming quite the pain in the a$$. It really was best just to kill her...
And, now that she is dead, there is no hope. Why was it such a terrible crime to allow her to live at the hands of her parents taking over the hospice care, and allowing them to hope? Do you have kids? Do you love 'em? Ever lose one or think about losing one?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChasUFarley
I think what has bothered us as Americans the most about this ordeal with Terri's death isn't the battle between her husband and family or agreeing that the state she was in wasn't really "living", BUT the fact that all it took to pull the plug, so to speak, was the simple removal of a feeding tube.
It certainly seems barbaric enough - I mean, who would intentionally starve themselves to death in two weeks to commit suicide? In this country we have to, by law, protect and feed our children, right? If we don't we are not good parents - we'll go to jail! Same goes with our pets. So, how do we justify the removal of a feeding tube - the only "life support" this woman had - as a way to provide her with her last wishes? It sounds horrific, yet it is done every day in hospices, hospitals and even at-home deaths. Although this has been done for years it does not seem like a "humane" way to end a life.
So...
I think the bigger issue, really, is that America needs to better define the "humane" way to the end life and consider better care and comfort measures for terminal patients - and especially euthanisia.
This is a funny country we live in. Americans will talk about sex on prime-time TV, watch people eat god-knows-what on reality shows, but still have our heads in the sand about death... and we have the biggest generation ever of Americans hitting the elder-stages of life... God help us.
(I will now don my flack jacket and helmet because I'm sure the fur will fly...)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Yanagisawa
Don't y'all get tired of being told what to care about, what to be "up in arms" about, what to get your evangelical dander up about by the likes of Robertson and Dobson.
This case became a darling in the eyes of the media because of it's inherent intrigue. (Starvation and dehydration as opposed to the kidney failure and cardiac arrest that might arise by unplugging a machine)
Yes, by gosh, it's tragic...but people are pulled off of artificial life support every day...my grandfather was taken off of a respirator but the whole country didn't talk about it for two weeks.
I have enough ethical dilemma and problem solving to keep me busy in Indiana without being manipulated by opportunists like Dobson and Robertson to act like I really, really, really, really care about some girl in FL whom I never met.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
J0nny Ling0
She wasn't on a respirator. She wasn't on any life support machines. They took away her food and water and killed her. That is a cruel way to murder someone...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Too Gray Now
Jonny L....
I agree. No Water/food is a bad, bad way to go. Yet the same “court” systems approve that we give sedatives to death row inmates BEFORE they get a lethal injection. For humane purposes.
The courts decided to kill her… in a harmless way... it MUST happen “naturally”. (I thik I am about to hurl)
The courts, like our representatives, are supposed to be a reflection of US - we the people. This is our country… not theirs.
Death, like life, is deeply personal. Or, at least I think should be.
Seems as though we are saying that any time ANY life is in the balance... Judges ONLY get to decide… when and if, there is ANY conflict.
(And by the way, my Dad passed many years ago - cancer. He was young. It went fast. He suffered. I wept. We all tried. Everything. He died. But ... NO COURTS decided his fate. If they had…. I would be in DEEP conflict, today)
If the idea of courts is to end conflict… AND THAT IS THE IDEA OF COURTS
I think they just started a whole bunch of it. They resolved nothing. They inflamed the difficult.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
HCW
You know what I find appalling?
Why have none of the great christian leaders who are up in arms about this mentioned that both Adam and Jesus Christ said,
"Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh." Genesis 2:24 - Adam
"For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh." Matthew 19:5 - Jesus, the second Adam.
Both of those men, according to God, were spokesmen for the entire human race.
Yet I don't hear Christians shouting, or see them marching with THAT on their signs.
I'm not thinking that Terri's condition meets the Biblical conditions for Michael Schiavo to divorce her either.
Had he divorced her because of her condition he'd be branded a jerk for that too.
Hmmm. Money & sex. The two biggest things that drive TV just happen to be woven into this issue too. Now there's death. Let's take bets as to which network puts out the first miniseries on it & when.
As harsh as it may sound, Terri's father gave his dughter to Michael when he married her. Terri LEFT father and mother to be one with Michael.
Of course this is a horrible situation. Horrible for Terri, whose death releases her from the bondage of her malfunctioning body.
Again. I don't hear the great Christian leaders soapboxing before millions of how her next moment of consciousness is:
"...the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first..."
She's getting a new body that is unquestionably "alert and responsive."
I've heard them say, "appalling," and "shameful" referring to Michael Schiavo. He's after money! people shout. The website "terrisfight.org" the online home of the Terri Schindler-Schiavo Foundation has links in this order;
home
about us
donations...
"Please note: Because the Terri Schindler-Schiavo Foundation is solely focused on saving Terri's life, the Foundation is not a 501©(3) tax-exempt public charity. Therefore, private donations to the Foundation are not tax deductible. All donations are used solely for the purpose of protecting Terri. Donating through this website and direct mail to the Foundation's St. Petersburg Beach address listed below are the ONLY ways to guarantee that 100% of your donation will be received by the Foundation.
No comment.
All of the judges, all the way up to our supreme court, are idiots. They can't read, they don't care about Terri, they care more that her jerk of a husband gets HIS way than her loving mother, HERS. They are more concerned with being "activist" than they are with judicial order and rule of law.
They're just plan mean.
Murderers, all of 'em.
Right?
Terri Schiavo's death is no more senseless than the 1500+ Americans who've died in IRAQ. Some of them have had THEIR bodies ripped to pieces by explosive devices or bullets.
What about the thousands who lost their lives on the beach at Normandy where there was so much blood the waves were red with it.
The tragedy here in my opinion is that this poor woman was forced to live 15 years in this persistent, yet not really, vegetative state. Aware of the tube in her throat. Aware of the bed sores, aware that she can see but can't move with any real semblance of control, can't speak, can't function as a human, her body reduced to little more than an organic machine, that she, once pretty and "vital" was trapped in.
We don't know for sure but can guess that yes, she really wanted to live like that.
I know I wouldn't and DON'T. This life just doesn't mean enough to me to live it confined to a bed as she.
I've never worked in a hospice. I've only visited a couple of nursing homes on a few occasions. I do know that both my Mother and my Father both had something goin on between them and God concerning their deaths that God didn't let the rest of my family in on.
They were both "strangely aware" of their impending deaths. God took care of them. I'm sure he took care of Terri too.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
Two things occur to me:
1) Nobody "murdered" her. They just let her die. Before that they were forcing her to live; if they'd just let her lie down in a bed she'd have died long ago. If someone should be kept alive for that much time, then there needs to be consent on the part of whoever is paying the bills and sacrificing their time/life.
2) The reason those people say they are outraged is because they want to reverse Roe vs Wade through the 'back door'.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
On March 31, 2005 -- you, I, and the entire world saw a murder in progress, finally reaching it's culmination.
See ya in that *better land*, Terri. This one stinks, all the way up to High Heavan.
:(-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mister P-Mosh
Do you always resort to spelling names in an insulting manner when you know you are wrong?
I have a wife, and I love her, and would not keep her body alive like Terri Schiavo's was, especially when my wife has told me throughout this whole thing that she would not want to live like that. My wife believes that when you die, you go to heaven/hell and so to be dead in the mind but have your body kept alive unnaturally like Terri Schiavo was, is torture. Not only that, but there was 0% chance of her recovering. She couldn't grow a new brain to be able to live.
So in response to your insulting question, I ask you. Do you love your wife? Would you keep her body alive unnaturally after her mind had died just so you don't have to face reality? I understand and I feel sorry for Terri's parents as well as her husband and the rest of her family. They all suffered, and I can empathize with all of them. However, the pity I have for the Schindlers does not mean that I agree with them, and it does not mean that I do not think that they were delusional.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mister P-Mosh
That has nothing to do with Terri Schiavo though. Macaroni Grill gives you bread and an oil dipping sauce before they serve you your food. It is barbaric that they do not give this to death row inmates.
You are completely wrong, and if you can't even grasp this basic concept, then you understand nothing about this case. Michael Schiavo carried out what he felt were the wishes of his wife. He brought it to the courts because he felt that it would bring about an end to the conflict between him and the parents so that experts could take a look and help them decide.
No, they are Americans just like you or I, and they ruled in favor of what was right. Just because you and maybe 3% of the nation wanted to keep her body alive unnaturally doesn't mean that you speak for the American people. If you don't want to abide by the laws of our country, you are free to convince the rest of us that you are right and that we should change our laws. If you want to sit back and talk about how we should turn the nation into a theocracy based on American Taliban beliefs like Pat Robertson's opinion, there are plenty of nations in the middle east that might be a little more appropriate for you.
Then why are you trying to butt in with the personal lives of the Schiavos and Schindlers? Why do you want to pass laws that interfere with people's choice for life and death, or the rights of the family to decide whether or not to continue life support?
The only reason they failed here is because overzealous religious politicians encouraged the mental illnesses of the Schindlers and tried to take advantage of it to force our nation to adopt their religious beliefs as law, and especially tried to use this as a backdoor to end legal and safe abortion, as johniam pointed out.
"They" meaning the media and religious leaders, since they are the ones that inflamed this and turned it into a media circus.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rejoice
Sorry about the "We" statement. I was upset and it was meant to be a collective term regarding our country. The US has made so many compromises on what our forefathers fought to maintain; that life and freedom was sacred.
When there is no written declaration , I believe we should err on the side of life. I have a relative who is brain damaged and lives in an institution, who responds slowly and crudely like Terri, yet he does respond. I could see her response in those tapes. The brain is an area that we humans just don't understand, regardless of all our technology and our supposed wisdom.
If the parents were willing to go visit everyday for 15 years, what was it to Terri's husband?? Let them have their daughter for what remaining years they have on this earth. The hardest thing for a mother to do is to watch her baby suffer pain and hunger when she knows how to help. It's an instinctual and overwhelming drive to feed them. On the other hand, I believe that if euthanasia is going to be an option, then starvation should NOT be the method.
A lot of us flippantly state we wouldn't want to live incapacitated, but when the hour comes, a lot of us would likely change our mind. It happens all the time. Christopher Reeve always said that, and initially wanted his life support removed. But then he changed his mind and fought hard for 10 years, all the while enjoying his family as best he could. He was on more life support than Mrs Schiavo.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LG
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LG
Rejoice, you did not see Terri Schiavo respond in those tapes. You saw a carefully filmed and edited deception.
Christopher Reeve was not mentally incapacitated and did not compare in any way to Terri Schiavo.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sunesis
If we're going to talk about, well, Michael is the husband, his word should be obeyed - please, that doesn't wash - not in this situation.
In this case, I do not think Michael lived up to his wedding vows at all. He forgot the "in sickness" and in health part, the until death do us part section. He would bring his girlfriend along with him to visit Terri. He has a common law wife and two children. He's not great principled guy. He forfeited any right to decide she should die.
As for everyone talking about how great the "law" is, and the "judges" are. America's dirty little secret is that every judge who is elected, almost all of his contributions come from lawyers. The lawyers own the judges in this country - not the people. Come election time, we have every single judge running for something or other traipsing through our offices, and the lawyers are told to give (of course, the firm reimburses them). If people knew this, they'd be up in arms. This makes for very partial judgment, when the lawyer standing in front of the Judge gave him $10,000 to be there.
Most of you were telling a different story when the Supreme Court gave Bush the election. Where was all your respect, reverance and awe for the law then? Don't be such hypocrites.
I think the reason this case has drawn so much attention is one word: doubt.
I have great doubt about Michael, 7 years later, suddenly remembering, he had this conversation with his wife, when others who knew her, even discussing a similar situation, said she disapproved. I think Michael lied. I think Michael decided it was time for her to go so he could "move on" - with a little extra money in his pocket, of course.
Just because he was the husband, so what! How many husbands have never erred. He abdicated his rights to her when he broke his wedding vows, entered into another relationship with a woman and had her children.
Now people are defending polygamy? ok, whatever. If a woman decided to take on another husband while married to you men here, I bet you'd be up in arms.
There was just too much doubt in this case.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
J0nny Ling0
No P. I don't always resort to spelling names in an insulting manner. You would not believe how many times I have refrained from calling you that. This was the first time. Couldn't resist, sorry. In this case, your impudence just seemed to warrent it.
And no, I didn't resort to it "because I know I am wrong" as you say. I only resorted to it because your arrogance irks me so. But yes, resort to it I did, sorry. This is a very hot and emotional issue I suppose, and I am not on your side of the thinking...
And by the way, does this mean that everyone here who refers to VPW as "Vee Pee" is wrong?
But yeah,..kill her... great choice...And if it happens to one of your children down the road, should you father any, then at that time consider what you would do then.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.