Posted on 02/26/2005 3:47:17 PM PST by Hildy
It's galling when you call everyone else "cold and heartless", it's hypocritical when you start yelping for cold heartless murder.
Hey Hildy, Buck up!
What's the truth? You find it funny that a cat should be killed unneccessarily? Frankly, I don't find it funny at all, and I don't wish death on anyone.
You guys are killing me! Nobody killed a cat, you only want to kill Terri Mr. PETA.
You're sadly mistaken.
PLEASE don't think I'm confrontational. I just want to make a point. If God wanted Terri RIGHT NOW, there's nothing man could do to stop Him. That alone gives me pause enough to think He has a reason for her being here. Still.
A judge, yeah who isn't as corrupt as this one.
Would a judge really order the death of someone who could still be saved?
Yes, apparently there are all sorts of family and financial ties that are just coming to light.
If this judge were really interested in fairness and justice, he would have removed the 'husband' as guardian for his having abandoned the 'ward' - his wife, that he vowed to care for, when he he took up living with another woman. Can you say conflict of interest?
I just do not know how any honest person can tell me that this POS doesn't have a conflict of interest.
You are aware that such opi are viewed as hilarious, aren't you?
Oh yeah, you're not reading this.
I really hope you are intelligent enough to know it isn't a matter of "disagreeing".
Its being so critical is all the more reason to control your tongues and do what actually wins support.
That especially means not running around insulting those who you even think might disagree with you, or those who agree on the important thing but don't buy into the whole nutty conspiracy theory. You only make unnecessary enemies that way.
This should not be so hard for so many of you to manage.
It almost seems like you have your whole heart in that statement. I suppose you could point out all of your posts where you wanted Terri to live. Go ahead..... I would love for you to prove me wrong.
It also falls into the area of principled argument vs argument of principles.
I have determined that many argue, or try to argue when they have a principle to defend.
It causes utter chaos on the thread. Principles, whether religious dogma or ones that come through thought cannot be argued, and can only be be defended.
In a nut shell, that is what I am seeing here. The degradation of the argument is certain and cannot be avoided, except by refraining from participation.
You have proven nothing but your apparent vindictive nature when it comes to the subject at hand.
Any discussion requires some give and take.
Absent that, you might just as well go fly a kite.
That's your job, but I see you're too busy calling me a "murderer" and I haven't even told you the reasons beyond "Gods will" for Terri to live.
Terri appeared to be a vibrant and smart gal, and that has not been challenged.
She has been on a feeding tube for over 15 years. It is a long time and I have no doubt I would be entertaining all the ideas that have confronted the family and Terri's supporters.
If you believe in life than you cannot see any other resolution to this case. I beg to differ.
Those who wish to keep the feeding tube in says physical therapy might help.
If this is the case why didn't the courts issue that as a requirement years ago. It is unforgivable that anyone missed this.
Here are my concerns and why I am feeling the way that I do.
I cannot put myself in her shoes, the family or the husband. I can say is this a quality of life that she would wish upon her family. Her parents are retirement age. They have gone bankrupt to pursue this. They are older. Should they win then who becomes the guardian? Oh, I know the state will, and the state will foot the bill.
Another slippery slope issue, she finds herself with the need for a kidney. Why wouldn't she eligible for the kidney? One needs only be in perfect health to receive a kidney or any other organ. She is diagnosed with cancer -- harsh as this might sound -- do we give treatment and if so where does it end.
Now they say there is abuse and ask for 60 days. Why the hell did this not get reported long ago? Was it a ploy to get the extension? It is disturbing.
I feel some anger towards the justice system allowing this to go on, year after year.
I will repeat I am pro life and I may be the only one to say this and I stand by my thoughts.
I like many of you enjoy a good, honest and intellectually stimulating debate. I also know that we may not agree on all issues. But, we can always in the end be kind enough to one another and agree to disagree.
For me FR is a wonderful site to offer my thoughts and to learn from others.
My prayers for all.
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Florida Constitution, Statement of Rights
SECTION 2. Basic rights.--All natural persons, female and male alike, are equal before the law and have inalienable rights, among which are the right to enjoy and defend life and liberty, to pursue happiness, to be rewarded for industry, and to acquire, possess and protect property; except that the ownership, inheritance, disposition and possession of real property by aliens ineligible for citizenship may be regulated or prohibited by law. No person shall be deprived of any right because of race, religion, national origin, or physical disability.
Now, I have one question for you: Is Terry Schindler Schiavo a PERSON??
If your answer is yes, why should your opinions carry more weight than the foundational documents that lay out the rule of law in our Republic?
This is precisely the reason that M. Shiavo petitioned the court to decide this issue and has pledged to abide by that decision, whatever it may be.
This procedure is the protection of Terry's rights.
Sorry to hear about the loss of your father and your mother's ill health. I am caring for an otherwise healthy -- she'll likely outlive me -- mother who is almost 85 and has Alzheimer's. It can be heartwrenchingly hard to deal with these issues. My biggest problem is the frustration of constantly repeating myself and the sadness that grips me as she sits and tries to figure out what's happening to her.
I don't know if we have ever had any encounters prior to this. I remember your name since I went to the MFJ back in 1998 and started lurking soon afterwards. I remember a lot of battles here with a lot of people, so since I don't remember fighting with you, either we didn't fight or it wasn't bad.
All of this to say is that this may be our first clash or our worst, but the excerpt above is where I believe that you lose most of your antagonists and get them so mad. This issue is emotional enough, but MS is hardly 'innocent'. At the very least, he has and has had a serious conflict of interest since he took up with the other woman (and maybe even prior to that). Without going into any other possibilities, that alone should disqualify him to make ANY decisions regarding the well being of Terri.
I've not read any of your posts on this subject so whether or not you are too emotionally involved due to personal circumstances is above my pay grade. Maybe not blaming Michael helps you to feel that you are doing the right thing all of the time. I do know that a lot of people DO feel guilty about things for which they bear no guilt in caring for loved ones.
MS is not one of the innocents. I think that he is the lowest form of life, but even he doesn't deserve what he wants his wife to endure. We don't treat convicted murderers like that and Terri isn't guilty of anything except living when her husband wants her to die.
FRegards, one way or t'other.
Exactly. Near as I can tell, all sides are following the law.
Beyond "God will", that sounds interesting? None of your quotes are attributable to me however, if that may of been your intent.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.