To: DelphiUser
"There is NO WAY for you to know what Terry wants."
Likewise to you. But you are willing to err on the side of death.
Unless she stated she wants to be starved to death, then she should be fed and cared for like any other incapacitated person.
You are willing to take the word of her husband, who is hopelessly conflicted and is shacking up while he says he loves Terri so much.
That is incredibly naive and gullible IMHO.
598 posted on
03/21/2005 3:24:37 PM PST by
SerpentDove
(Would you have starved Ronald Reagan?)
To: SerpentDove
Michael should not be her guardian.
Terri's parents are also weird, but probably should be her guardians.
This solves the problem without the court stepping in and making the right not to be kept alive more difficult to exercise.
This is my point, fix it without new laws. Fix it without congress. Fix it without all the political posturing. Michael being a scumbag should be handled separately from Terri's rights.
603 posted on
03/24/2005 7:28:55 AM PST by
DelphiUser
("You can lead a man to knowledge, but you can't make him think")
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson