POLL? Who's the villain in the Terri Schiavo case?

PHX news | 3/24/05 | AZ Righty

[tioga]

The God given sanctity of life trumps all else. This is a horror we will live to regret as a society. God have mercy on us.

[NY-YANK]

Who's the villain in the Terri Schiavo case?

Just those who are sticking their noses in where they don't belong. Hopefully I didn't leave anyone out.

[Kozak]

Does the governmnet have a right to stop you from beating your kids or murdering your wife? Try to starve your dog and you will find yourself under arrest.

[Robert A Cook PE]

Show me any evidence that she wanted to die.

Anything.

[smoothsailing]

The villain dwells in the minds of those who believe that a court decision or a political philosophy is more important than the saving of an innocent life.

[international american]

Schiavo may very well have done this to his wife. This case is as botched as the Ramsey case, if not more so.

[MOgirl]

Hello,

Good Lord, what other choice do we have but to defend life with the courts (Ha!Ha!), or the government? For one moment, look at the fact of this case, and put yourself in Terri's place. Would you scream at government interference if this were you or a loved one?

Those here who cry for letting this continue, leading to her death by withholding food and water, despite the overwhelming evidence of conflicts of interest by the Husband, Judge, Lawyers, etc... will have no one to blame but themselves when the same fate reaches you.

Glad to be here, MOgirl

[moneypenny]

14th amendment says it all.
There are times when the government must intervene. But what you are saying is that if you have three or four people abusing some other people and the police has done some things but hasn't really looked into the situation like they should and these people keep getting abused, and so you go to courts and they close their eyes to this. What else do you expect. The government is not to deprive ANY person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law; nor deny to ANY person within its jurisdiction the EQUAL protection of the law.

What if, just say, that Terri really didn't say that she didn't want to live that way. And just say that she does die and later we find out that it wasn't true. Can you bring back? What is wrong with just allowing her a few more days while this case could be reinvestigated a little more. Information has come out whether right or wrong should still be looked into, can you deny that? She has her rights too. Since there isn't a living will, we must look at life over death. If it were your child, no matter what you think right now, you wouldn't want that. There is always hope! Always. If you don't think there is hope, then why bother with stem cell or drugs of the future.

I still think that no matter everyone has right to life.

[Trust but Verify]

We can't give the husband sole unchecked authority to determine whether his wife lives or dies.,P>If not the guardian, who?

[MeekOneGOP]

[A repost of my comment on another thread earlier today].

I am resolved already that she will not be with us much longer. My hope is that she doesn't suffer terribly.

The Left consoles themselves saying that to die of starvation and dehydration is euphoric experience. Yeah, right. Judge Greer, please fast and don't drink for _____ (fill in the blank with however long Terri goes without before she expires), and let me know how euphoric it is, okay??

I think that Michael Shiavo may be an underhanded snake. I have thought about this and have tried to use the golden rule of thumb. What if I was in Michael's situation (assuming he has NOT done anything underhanded)? I would have long ago relented and handed her over to her parents, and let them deal with her the best they could and decide for her what was best. There is NO DAM* WAY in he**, I would have dragged this out like he did digging his heels in and going against the wishes of Terri's Mom and Dad. I would have told them "Mom and Dad, I'm so sorry for what Terri has gone through. If you want to take over responsibility for her, I'll sign the papers authorizing that." And I would have told them SQUARELY what Terri's expressed wishes were regarding being kept alive or allowed to pass on. If she never told me one way or the other, I would have told them that.

I don't think Michael cares one BIT about Terri - and hasn't for a long time ("is that bi*ch dead, yet?") - and I think he may have had some underhanded part in her situation. But that's only speculation, of course. We'll probably never know for sure, now that Terri is being sent to her starvation / dehydration death by these folks.

[Robert A Cook PE]

So, if I'm the guardian of a foster child, I can decide that I want to murder them?

[ARCADIA]

I blame governor Bush for allowing this circus to run rampant over his administration. He should sieze Terry, verify the evidence, and then debate the merits of the issue with the judiciary. This is still a representative republic, we should not be ruled by a judiciary.

[writer33]

This case is as botched as the Ramsey case, if not more so.

I haven't heard that one in a while. And you're right.

[Enterprise]

Because there is such a lengthy period of time between her initial hospitalization, and the time Michael "remembered" that she didn't want to live in this condition, and lacking proof beyond a reasonable doubt that it was her wish to die, I believe that there is dreadful error because the courts did not defer to her Constitutional right to life.

[Muleteam1]

>>Does conservative church views trump conservative views on limited government?<<

If Terri dies from government-forced dehydration, I predict religious or secular conservatives will be as rare as hen's teeth in the White House or in Congress after this Administration for a long time. If I wanted a do-nothing Party, I would vote for a Democrat.

Muleteam1

[watchdog_writer]

you're wrong teeny, I want the government to intervene to outlaw anal sex, where millions of gays are killing each other with AIDS. I want the government to shut down the liberal oligarchy of judges who legislate from the bench laws that are abhorrent to men and women of traditional values.

It's not the body of big government we oppose, it is the big hand of socialist government policies that rob capitalism of its strength and vitality.

[Ohioan]

I agree with your view of Conservatism--so far as it goes, in your post.

But frankly, why do you need to identify a villain, here? People can have a dispute; can litigate that dispute. A Court can rule on that dispute. But none of the above need be a villain.

Now, do not get me wrong. I believe that the actions of Congress, last week end were beneath contempt. I believe that their grandstanding has done very real and very significant damage to the Conservative position that many of us have fought for, all our lives. But they are supposed to be responsible adults. They are supposed to be bound by their oaths of office. The family--either side in the Court Case--and/or the Florida Court--are not responsible for the crude effort by Congress to intervene. On the other hand, that attempted intervention was quickly shown to have been the absurd posturing that it was. It really had no impact on the actual case. So while Congress may be packed full of villains, it was not really a factor in the case.

Hence, one can not vote Congress the "villain," either.

William Flax Return Of The Gods Web Site