Terri's Fight - (Daily Thread/Updates) November 8 -10

I think George J. Felos is twice divorced and George W. Greer is thrice-divorced. Michael R. Schiavo (like Bill Clinton), however, has NEVER been divorced!!!!

1,121 posted on 11/10/2003 9:14:58 AM PST by Theodore R.

That's okay. No harm in posting some of these articles again. They get buried and before we started the daily thread, we didn't have information consolidated at all well. One of the few threads that had done so ended up getting pulled because of a flame war.

1,122 posted on 11/10/2003 9:17:33 AM PST by sweetliberty ("Having the right to do a thing is not at all the same thing as being right in doing it.")

I know for a fact that my Disney stock has split since then. Coca Cola has gone through the roof.

Here is something interesting. April 1993 there was $776,254 in Terri's rehab account - Five years later it was $713,825 - that means only $62,429 of the principle had been spent.

Now that breaks down to $12,485.80 annually over five, that's right, FIVE YEARS.

That is only $1,040.48 a MONTH that is being spent on, what, Terri?

1,123 posted on 11/10/2003 9:18:48 AM PST by Budge ( <>< .)

I have to confess, I am never surprised at the depths of liberal depravity. Let your imagination run. Imagine the worst possible thing they could say or do. No matter what unspeakable horror we expect, they will burst forth with something more despicable, more heartless, more inhuman. Count on it.

1,124 posted on 11/10/2003 9:20:09 AM PST by T'wit (If they say "Give peas a chance," they are Pod People.)

To: sweetliberty

One of the few threads that had done so ended up getting pulled because of a flame war.

That's a shame!

1,125 posted on 11/10/2003 9:20:56 AM PST by nicmarlo

> (I wondered whether I could write this book without referring to Star Trek, and didn't get past page three!)

I have suspected for decades that Boomers -- THAT kind of Boomers, anyway -- got their theology from Star Trek, not from the Bible.

1,126 posted on 11/10/2003 9:22:45 AM PST by T'wit (If they say "Give peas a chance," they are Pod People.)

good read.....forgive me if this has already been posted.Worth posting again.

Lying about Terri Schiavo By Nat Hentoff

The Village Voice | November 10, 2003

I have covered highly visible, dramatic "right to die" cases—including those of Karen Ann Quinlan and Nancy Cruzan—for more than 25 years. Each time, most of the media, mirroring one another, have been shoddy and inaccurate.

The reporting on the fierce battle for the life of 39-year-old Terri Schiavo has been the worst case of this kind of journalistic malpractice I've seen.

On October 15, Terri's husband and legal guardian, Michael Schiavo, ordered the removal of her feeding tube. As she was dying, the Florida legislature and Governor Jeb Bush overruled her husband on October 21, and the gastric feeding tube has been reinserted pending further recourse to the court.

So intent is Michael Schiavo on having his wife die of starvation that one of his lawyers, after the governor's order to reconnect the feeding tube, faxed doctors in the county where the life-saving procedure was about to take place, threatening to sue any physician who reinserted a feeding tube. The husband had immediately gone to court to get a judge to revoke what the legislature and the governor had done.

The husband claims that he is honoring his marriage vows by carrying out the wishes of his wife that she not be kept alive by "artificial means." As I shall show, this hearsay "evidence" by the husband has been contradicted. The purportedly devoted husband, moreover, has been living with another woman since 1995. They have a child, with another on the way. Was that part of his marital vows?

For 13 years, Terri Schiavo has not been able to speak for herself. But she is not brain-dead, not in a comatose state, not terminal, and not connected to a respirator. If the feeding tube is removed, she will starve to death. Whatever she may or may not have said, did she consider food and water "artificial means?"

The media continually report that Terri is in a persistent vegetative state, and a number of neurologists and bioethicists have more than implied to the press that "persistent" is actually synonymous with "permanent." This is not true, as I shall factually demonstrate in upcoming columns. I will also provide statements from neurologists who say that if Terri were given the proper therapy—denied to her by her husband and guardian after he decided therapy was becoming too expensive despite $750,000 from a malpractice suit—she could learn to eat by herself and become more responsive.

Terri is responsive, beyond mere reflexes. Having this degree of sentience, if she is starved to death, she will not "die in peace" as The New York Times predicts in an uninformed October 23 editorial supporting the husband. What happens to someone who can feel pain during the process of starvation is ghastly.

Increasingly, New York Times editorials are not as indicative of conscious liberal "bias" as they are of ignorance or denial of the facts, as I have demonstrated in my series on Judge Charles Pickering.

In all the stories on Terri Schiavo and her parents' determined efforts to save her life, the media continually report that the Florida legislature intervened because of many thousands of calls, letters, and e-mails from the Christian Right and pro-lifers. Those groups and individuals are indeed a major factor in rousing support to prevent Terri from being starved to death. But among the many others who sent urgent messages are disabled Americans and their organizations.

Except for the op-ed page article by Stephen Drake of the Not Dead Yet organization in the October 29 Los Angeles Times ("Disabled Are Fearful: Who Will Be Next?") and a letter in the October 24 New York Times, I have seen hardly any mention in the press of the deeply concerned voices of the disabled, many of whom, in their own lives, have survived being terminated by bioethicists and other physicians who strongly believe that certain lives are not worth living. The numbers of these "new priesthoods of death," as I call them, are increasing.

The letter to The New York Times signed by Max Lapertosa, staff counsel, Access Living in Chicago—told of "14 national disability organizations that filed a friend-of-the-court brief to support keeping Terri Schiavo alive." Lapertosa objected to a Times editorial calling for Terri to go gently into that good night because, said the moral philosophers of the Times, "true respect for life includes recognizing . . . when it ceases to be meaningful."

Max Lapertosa reminded Gail Collins's board of oracles at the Time's editorial page that "many would lump into this category [of meaningless lives] people with severe autism, multiple sclerosis or cerebral palsy who, like Mrs. Schiavo, are nonverbal and are often described as being "in their own world."

"The judicial sanctioning of such attitudes," Lapertosa continued, "moves America back to the days when the sterilization and elimination of people with disabilities did not merely reflect private prejudices but were embraced as the law of the land."

In the Los Angeles Times' October 29 op-ed piece by Stephen Drake, he writes: "I was born brain-damaged as a result of a forceps delivery. The doctor told my parents I would be a 'vegetable' for the rest of my life—the same word now being used for Schiavo—and that the best thing would be for nature to take its course. They refused. Although I had a lot of health problems, surgeries and pain as a child, I went on to lead a happy life." And clearly, his is a very articulate life. I have interviewed other such "vegetables."

Ignoring the facts of the case, the American Civil Liberties Union—to my disgust, but not my surprise in view of the long-term distrust of the ACLU by disability rights activists—has marched to support the husband despite his grave conflicts of interests in this life-or-death case. The ACLU claims the governor and the legislature of Florida unconstitutionally overruled the courts, which continued to declare the husband the lawful guardian. On the other hand, the ACLU cheered when Governor George Ryan of Illinois substituted his judgment for that of the courts by removing many prisoners from death row. In a later column, I'll go deeper into the constitutional debate over saving Terri's life.

In the October 28 weeklystandard.com, Wesley Smith, author of Forced Exit—who has accurately researched more of these cases than anyone I know—reports that of the $750,000 to be held in trust for Terri's rehabilitation, two of Michael Schiavo's lawyers pressing for removal of her feeding tube have been paid more than $440,000. Whom did that rehabilitate? Any comment from the ACLU? If the husband and the lawyers succeed, maybe the ACLU will send flowers to Terri's funeral.

1,127 posted on 11/10/2003 9:22:56 AM PST by pollywog (Psalm 121;1 I Lift mine eyes to the hills from whence cometh my help.)

don't want you messing it up for the rest of us :-)

1,128 posted on 11/10/2003 9:23:11 AM PST by nicmarlo

To: daylate-dollarshort

1,129 posted on 11/10/2003 9:23:13 AM PST by The Red Zone

To: daylate-dollarshort; Mo1; The Red Zone

?Better check this out! Suddenly leaves PA??? Why?? Better check and see what his criminal record is. Check his juvenile record, does he frequent postitutes?? Does he have a drug record.....etc....etc...etc...etc..........

Such drama in your mind, daylate always more than a dollar short.

1,130 posted on 11/10/2003 9:26:50 AM PST by nicmarlo

The ACLU claims the governor and the legislature of Florida unconstitutionally overruled the courts, which continued to declare the husband the lawful guardian. On the other hand, the ACLU cheered when Governor George Ryan of Illinois substituted his judgment for that of the courts by removing many prisoners from death row. In a later column, I'll go deeper into the constitutional debate over saving Terri's life.

hypocrites hypocrites hypocrites

1,131 posted on 11/10/2003 9:28:18 AM PST by The Red Zone

To: nicmarlo; Theodore R.

"Have you noticed that nearly all of the players in Terri's fight are transplanted Floridians?"

"Yeah...kind of odd"

Have either of you super-sleuths noticed that nearly all Floridians are "transplants" from other states??. Jobs in the service industry have been plentiful and are growing. Florida is the #1 retirement destination in the nation. As a result, the population of Florida has grown exponentially for decades and is predicicted to continue to grow wildly as the baby boomers from the mid to late 40's are reaching retirement age. With the increase in retired population, there is a corresponding increase of those who seek employment in the service industry and those who seek to open service businesses.

1,132 posted on 11/10/2003 9:35:07 AM PST by daylate-dollarshort

To: daylate-dollarshort; Theodore R.

No....I NEVER knew or realized this, ever, ever.

1,133 posted on 11/10/2003 9:39:54 AM PST by nicmarlo

I hope and trust (?) the federal regs will not allow death by dehydration, regardless of the COD opinions. We should find those regs!

> Of course, the Schiavo-Felos-Greer triumvirate does not regard removal of a feeding tube as "euthanasia" but a "natural process."

True, true. Try Dr. Felos McMoonbeam's Natural Death Diet! Simply push yourself away from the table. Miraculous results in only ten to fourteen days, guaranteed. You will lose your surplus fat, body moisture, brain function and heartbeat. Nothing to it! And just think of it, Dr. McMoonbeam could be on Oprah and all the good shows and make zillions with a new diet book.

1,134 posted on 11/10/2003 9:40:38 AM PST by T'wit (If they say "Give peas a chance," they are Pod People.)

Of course, the Schiavo-Felos-Greer triumvirate does not regard removal of a feeding tube as "euthanasia" but a "natural process."

So True....

WND incorrectly reported that Felos is an advocate of euthanasia. Felos stresses he advocates the withdrawal of feeding tubes, but opposes euthanasia, which he defines as "the active intervention of an external agent to end a life" and, as he pointed out, is a criminal act. Further, Felos said he is a staunch supporter of better end-of-life care for patients which he believes will reduce public support for euthanasia and asssisted suicide. WND regrets the error.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=29644

1,135 posted on 11/10/2003 9:46:22 AM PST by Krodg

Thanks, now read my post 1123.

Does any of that make sense?

1,136 posted on 11/10/2003 9:49:24 AM PST by Budge ( <>< .)

Halting feedings is NOT "the active intervention of an external agent to end a life"? What kind of double speak is that? And how did WND ever swallow that malarkey -- did he threaten to sue them for a jillion bucks?

What if, PURELY hypothetically speaking :-), I suspended George Felos out the 100th story of a tall building then cut the rope? There would be no "active intervention of an external agent to end his life" -- only the very natural meeting with the pavement.

What doofuses does he take us for?

1,137 posted on 11/10/2003 9:53:05 AM PST by The Red Zone

Still, in Terri's case Felos' position is a distinction without a difference. Removing a feeding tube in Terri's case is the same as ending her life. If the tube stays in, she continues to live.

1,138 posted on 11/10/2003 9:57:15 AM PST by Theodore R.

Curiously -- very curiously -- Felos recently denied that Terri was getting any tax-paid help, which may have been more of his twisted tongue.

Plus the post where some finance officer(?) at $un$et ho$pice claims they can't find any records of payment - for three years!

What the hell does that mean?

Is Felos helping them to cook the books? Is this an attempt to cover up government assistance - an attempt to cover his sorry behind?

1,139 posted on 11/10/2003 10:00:04 AM PST by Budge ( <>< .)

To: T'wit; Budge

H.R. 1003 generally would prohibit Federal funds from being used for the purpose of causing or assisting in causing the death of any individual by assisted suicide, euthanasia, or mercy killing. This rule would apply to direct funding of the purchase of services to Federal institutions which provide health services, and Federal personnel who provide medical services. The legislation makes clear, however, that the prohibition would not limit Federal funding or otherwise affect the withholding of medical treatments or services, or efforts to alleviate pain or discomfort, that may increase the risk of death, so long as such services are not furnished for the purpose of causing or assisting in the causing of death.

This restriction on Federal funding would apply to both Medicare (Title XVIII of the Social Security Act) and to the Title XX Social Services Block Grant (Title XX of the Social Security Act). H.R. 1003 also would apply to other programs and Federal health care facilities, including the Maternal and Child Health Block Grant Program, the Public Health Service Act, the Indian Health Care Improvement Act, the Federal Employees Health Benefit Program, the Developmental Disabilities and Bill of Rights Act, the Military Health Care System, Veterans Medical Care, Health Services for Peace Corps Volunteers, and Medical Services for Federal Prisoners.

In addition, the bill would prohibit the use of Federal funds for advocacy that would assist in or support assisted suicide, euthanasia, or mercy killing, or to bring suit or provide any form of legal assistance for assisted suicide, euthanasia, or mercy killing.

http://waysandmeans.house.gov/legacy/health/105cong/hl-1act.htm

H.R.1003 Text, PDF
Title: To clarify Federal law with respect to restricting the use of Federal funds in support of assisted suicide.
Sponsor: Rep Hall, Ralph M. [TX-4] (introduced 3/11/1997) Cosponsors: 118
Latest Major Action: 4/30/1997 Became Public Law No: 105-12.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin//bdquery/z?d105:h.r.1003:

1,140 posted on 11/10/2003 10:01:33 AM PST by nicmarlo

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794