[William Terrell]

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.

It is the basic philosophy, that you do no harm. Now, many are willing to advance beyond the basic philosophy. There are people that volunteer to take care of someone, who would ordinarily die, all the time.

That is their choice. It's also Mr. Shiavo's choice, and rightfully his under the law, the common law and custom. Conservatives supposed to conserve that. It is closest to Nature. Nature is unforgiving and we have a contract of obedience with her when we are born.

Michael's actions are between him and God, since the law that grants them presumes honest care, which is the case in almost all instances.

[Politicalmom]

The law isn't being followed. The murderous "husband" has a clear conflict of interest. Guardianship should automatically revert to Terri's parents.

[supercat]

That is their choice. It's also Mr. Shiavo's choice, and rightfully his under the law, the common law and custom. Conservatives supposed to conserve that. It is closest to Nature. Nature is unforgiving and we have a contract of obedience with her when we are born.

Michael isn't merely making the choice not to give Terri food and water himself, though; rather, he's seeking to prevent anyone else from providing it.

If you pick up a cat from a shelter, you are accepting the responsibility of providing a certain level of care for that cat. Severe neglect is punishable by law. That does not mean, though, that you're obligated for life to provide for the animal. If you become unable to care for it yourself you are allowed to either find someone else to care for it or return it to the shelter and let the shelter try to find someone (which they may or may not manage to do).

In short, you're not required to care for the animal yourself, but that does not give you the right to prevent others from doing so.

Should Michael's "property interest" in Terri exceed that of a cat owner over his pet?

[phenn]

>> It's also Mr. Shiavo's choice, and rightfully his under the law, the common law and custom.<<

Wrong. Mr. Schiavo is not a durable power of attorney over his wife's medical care. Therefore, he has no authority to withhold basic humane care such as food, water, shelter, cleanliness, treatment of infections. He is simply a guardian and guardians do NOT have that right. Under the Florida Statutes, he has no rights, only responsibilities to his ward.

You must be a judge because you certainly don't know the law.