STOP THE ACLU FROM MURDERING TERRI SCHIAVO!!!!

FreepinforTerri

[BlessedBeGod]

I haven't used any exclamation points in my posts.

I see you are more interested in trolling than learning anything about what you're talking about.

Sayonara.

[Defender2]

If you don't like my eclamation points, TROLL, please post your drivel on another forum, preferably, DU, TROLL!!!!

[Brad’s Gramma]

Zeke? Is that you Zeke?

[Defender2]

#20!!!!:-) Love Your Exclamation Points, Brad's Gramma!!!!:-)

[nickcarraway]

I think there are good reasons the ACLU should back away from this case. This is not a right-to-die case. You just have to put it in terms they understand.

[BlessedBeGod]

ROFL

[Brad’s Gramma]

!!!!!!?????????!!!!!!!!!!????????????

[JohnHuang2]

Bump

[Brad’s Gramma]

You did that wrong.

It was to be

BUMP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the heads up!

[supercat]

How is the ACLU "murdering" Terri Schiavo? You do not help your cause by making such wild and easily disproven accusations.

Michael Schiavo is seeking to have the state deprive his wife of food and water for the purpose of killing her. The media is portraying this as a "right to die" case, ignoring the facts that his wife is definitely not comatose and does not even seem to fit normal definitions of "permanent vegetative state"; his wife has parents and siblings who want to care for her; the husband has actively blocked any rehabilitative treatments; and the husband has shacked up with another woman and fathered two children by her, yet refuses to divorce his wife.

I would say that Michael Schiavo is trying to murder his wife. The ACLU, by taking Michael's side, is arguing that he should be able to murder his wife.

[JohnHuang2]

BUMP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

;-)

[EternalVigilance]

You're right. It isn't a 'right-to-die' case. It is clearly a right-to-life case.

You are also right that there are arguments that could be quite forceful in getting them to MAYBE reconsider.

Maybe Dick Armey or someone---don't I remember that he had gone to work for them?

[Defender2]

Since I gather your a Party Of Death demoCommiecRAT Sympathizer, TROLL, I am not going to answer your question that YOU DID NOT ASK ME IN THE FIRST PLACE, TROLL!!!! I ASKED MY QUESTION DIRECTLY TO YOU, TROLL!!!! SINCE YOU WON'T ANSWER MY QUESTION THAT I POISED DIRECTLY TO YOU, NEWBIE TROLL, I AM GOING TO IGNORE YOUR POSTS AND ADVISE ALL OTHERS ON THIS THREAD TO IGNORE YOURS AS WELL!!!!

[supercat]

Hmm... what ever happened to the Tr0uth?

[Brad’s Gramma]

SO much better!!!!!!!!
I was almost ready to hit the Abuse button on you for lack of explanation points!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Carry on!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[nickcarraway]

You are also right that there are arguments that could be quite forceful in getting them to MAYBE reconsider.

We have to say this is not a right-to-die case, this is a case about Terri's civil rights and if she is reduced to being her husband's property. Terri's rights, not Michael's. And of course, the ``death penalty'' angle is a good one to play.

[MHGinTN]

Nice synopsis, Cat!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!