Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: walford
What kind of 'sweet nothings' has Hubby been whispering in Terri's ear and what kind of effect would that have on her will to fight?

I have a very strong suspicion Terri wants to live long enough to see Hubby rot in prison.

33 posted on 10/19/2003 11:29:14 PM PDT by supercat (Why is it that the more "gun safety" laws are passed, the less safe my guns seem?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]


To: supercat
Re: wish to see Hubby rot in prison

I found this comment disrespectful.

(1) I would not consider Michael Schiavo to be Terri's husband. He has forsaken his vows for another woman with whom he has started a family. She has been reclaimed by her parents, and it is that relationship that I respect by law.

If Michael disagrees, I would ask him to show me the contract that bound him. Then I would show him where he breached his contract to "forsake all others" and to love his wife in sickness. You cannot enforce a contract on others that you are not upholding for them. Thus it is void.

(2) Terri's family wishes no harm or ill will toward Michael. They have offered to pay him whatever amount of money he would have received from life insurance. They have wished the best for him and his new family. I doubt that they would have taught Terri to be hateful or vengeful.

I think Terri would also think more positive than negative.

(3) The family's absolute obedience to Christian teachings
on loving one's enemies, even those who persecute and oppress, is part of the reason they were subjected to such injustice. I am appalled that their faith in Christian obedience to civil authority was abused in this case. However, Christians are taught to be thankful if their obedience serves as a witness to truth, and persecution will make them stronger. That is fine to believe, but in the end, I should think that the point is to find out how to correct the injustices to prevent them in the future.

My solution is to raise the standard, requiring consent of parties in religious disputes under law. That way the religious freedom of all parties is protected equally. If this case had been governed under the rule of consent, all this nonsense could have been nipped in the bud.

If a joint solution were required, Michael Schiavo would not waste time trying to manipulate or hide facts, as he would know the Schindlers would never agree. The reason he tried to abuse the law to cover up, is that the court permitted one side to win over the other. If consensus were the standard, such tactics would only prolong the process and thus be discouraged.

This process could only work when both parties seek equal rights and freedoms for each other. The Schindlers never wished ill on Michael, but wanted to resolve this for the best. Thus, I believe Terri would think more like they do.

And that is why they are being honored and rewarded, as they have acted sincerely while Michael has not. This proves that in the end you get what you wish for yourselves and others equally. If you wish ill, that is what you reap.


Yours truly,
Emily Nghiem
Houston, Texas
36 posted on 10/21/2003 1:05:36 AM PDT by emilynghiem (applying laws by consent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson