Replies

First, I do not listen to Bill O'Reilly. Our family does not own a television. We do not listen to ABC Radio either. Second, any decisions I have made about this have come from my own reading and observing the sometimes infantile behavior of this woman's advocates on FR.

Third, I can understand that sensationalism sells in this media-driven age, but why is this "murder"? I have seen that word thrown around, but fail to understand why.

If a couple decide to use birth control to prevent the implantation of an embryo when informed that another pregnancy could kill the mother, would you have the state intervene to compel the woman to go forward with the pregnancy? While that case would certainly have moral ramifications. I would classify that as a family matter. To be consistent, you would have to call for state intervention.

If my child is maintained on a respirator and it is concluded that he will never come off of that machine, would it be "murder" to decide to take that child off the respirator? Should the governor be called in to prevent the father from taking the painful course of watching his child die? I would suggest that was a family matter. To be consistent, you would have to call for state intervention.

I would suggest that you spend less time throwing loaded phrases and rhetoric around and calmly and objectively describe her medical condition for those of us who spend twleve hours a day at work, then come home to have dinner with our children and read to them every night before they go to bed. Many, of us, have not followed this story like you have.

Finally, if our sovereign God desires to preserve the mortal life of this poor woman, He can sustain her or raise her from her bed. Your energy and anger appear to be hopelessly and helplessly misdirected. Even if unrighteousness finally prevails, what do expect in a world full of sinners?

You do not understand this case, or you would be outraged at what is happening, instead of defending the status quo of politics. One day government may come for you, and there will be no one to speak up for you.

If my child is maintained on a respirator and it is concluded that he will never come off of that machine, would it be "murder" to decide to take that child off the respirator? Should the governor be called in to prevent the father from taking the painful course of watching his child die? I would suggest that was a family matter. To be consistent, you would have to call for state intervention.

You're missing a key point here. A feeding tube or a spoon is not a respirator or a life-saving medical device.

In fact, Terri could be fed with a spoon until Schiavo had her moved into his lawyer's death factory (hospice) and had all rehabilitative therapies stopped and all of her nutrition provided by the feeding tube. No more spoon-feeding. No more therapy. By Shiavo's actions Terri became entirely dependent upon the feeding tube for her nutrition. And, now, he's had the feeding tube removed.

Can you see now how this situation is different from those that you've stated? And that Schiavo is likely a murderer?