Parents of Terri Schindler-Schiavo Told to Pay to See Their Daughter

The Terri Schindler Foundation ^ | May 7, 2004 | Terri Foundation

[William Terrell]

The more important question is is it established without question that Terri wants to die?

Or doesn't want to die. Nobody knows. So it has to be 50/50. Even up. So anyone one on either side of the question has an equal chance of being wrong and wronging Terri.

If not, then she should not be put to death. Why is that so hard for you to understand? Do you believe a person's right to die is more important than their right to live?

I say a person has the natural and constitutional right to life. If he can survive on his own. If it's with the help of volunteers, it is a volunteer privilege.

[floriduh voter]

see 218. Maybe you should say "your honor."

[floriduh voter]

218 at your convenience. We report you decide.

[Ohioan from Florida]

Oh, Judge Hodges is my HERO!!!!! </sarcasm >

[William Terrell]

There is no parallel, on any significant level, among Christopher Reeves, Stephen Hawking and Terri Shiavo.

[supercat]

Hummm. . .why don't the Schindlers volunteer to guard Terri and take care of her?

Michael has refused all such offers.

[Ohioan from Florida]

Patience! He has to give the tough questions some thought! FWIW, he's ignored mine in 186 also! Maybe he's just not as smart as he wants us to think...or maybe he's smart enough to know what questions to avoid answering, thinking we'll lose interest in him. And maybe we will...

[Politicalmom]

BWAHAHAHAHHAHAHA!!!

An undercover troll!!!

[supercat]

Or doesn't want to die. Nobody knows. So it has to be 50/50. Even up. So anyone one on either side of the question has an equal chance of being wrong and wronging Terri.

Tell you what. You seem to know so much about statistics you should be a good gambling man. The numbers drawn in Sunday's afternoon drawing of the Illinois Lottery Pick-4 will either be 4-2-5-2 or they won't. So perhaps we should make a little wager: if the number is 4-2-5-2, I give you $150. If not, you give me $100. Since the odds are 50/50, the payout should work in your favor, right?

[Politicalmom]

And he is just as ignorant and stupid as all the other judges involved in this miscarriage of justice.

[TOUGH STOUGH]

Given her religion, her family, her Catholic school education,her childhood friends, several of whom have had masses said on Teri's behalf (praying Terri wins and her life is spared), and the fact that she is alive despite her appalling abuse and physical illnesses, the chance that Terri WANTS to die, are almost nil.

[Ohioan from Florida]

Isn't the internet wonderful, Google especially so?

[iowamomforfreedom]

If a person wants to live, and has someone willing to take care of them, does another person have a right to kill them?

[TOUGH STOUGH]

"I'd say, using your assumptions, that if she wanted to live, she would be able to without help."(WT)

That's ridiculous. There are countless adults who couldn't live without the physical help of others; Christopher Reeves and Stephen Hawking are two of the most notable. Are you suggesting they really don't want to live?(TS)

206 posted on 05/08/2004 9:45:24 PM PDT by TOUGH STOUGH

You didn't answer the question I asked.

[sport]

Ms. Bushnell should be arrested for impersonating a human being.

[TOUGH STOUGH]

But Christopher Reeves and Stephen Hawking also cannot survive without physical help from others. Therefore, according to you, they must not want to live and therefore shouldn't.

[floriduh voter]

Ya think a federal judge could get in MAJOR TROUBLE posting on the internet regarding a case that is on Appeal? Funny how the blue apple made a quick exit.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH. The elite among us think that commoners don't have @%&* for brains.

[floriduh voter]

218.

[supercat]

If it's with the help of volunteers, it is a volunteer privilege.

With the implication that if nobody volunteers to feed someone, that person should be allowed to starve. Not great, but not an unreasonable philosophy if one accepts that one person's need does not obligate anyone to fill it.

Not sure what it has to do with Terri's case, however, where there are a number of people who would volunteer their efforts on Terri's behalf if Michael would let them.

One could make a reasoned argument that Michael should not have to pay for Terri's care (at least not beyond the money awarded in court for that purpose). One could make a reasonaed argument that the government should not have to pay for Terri's care. I don't see how either of these arguments could be extended to suggest that those who want to provide for Terri's care should be forbidden from doing so.

[Politicalmom]

I am so impressed. Take a bow. : )