Posted on 02/18/2005 6:25:20 AM PST by wotan
Here's a way Jeb Bush may be able to save Terry Schiavo: Open an investigation into the possible assault that led to her comatose condition. Have the state pay for her maintenance to "preserve the evidence" and pay for language therapy for her so she can tell us what she knows about how she got into the coma. It struck me that the reason her husband wants her dead might be because he's afraid of what she'll say if she recovers. I don't see how a judge could possibly deny the state the right to preserve evidence of a serious assault.
Hope she's not dead yet.
Well, done, LOL!!!!!!!!
But that would mean Michael couldn't shut her up forever.
Because an examination of her person and records, both of which would be necessary if Michael loses guardianship, would result in a number of people going to prison for a long time.
Further, many politicians see Terri as an albatross they want to be rid of, and haven't read Coleridge enough to know that killing the albatross will not make it disappear.
Welcome to Free Republic! There are tons of great people here, even ones that I disagree with from time to time. I do find that Freepers have an amazing sense of humor that often has me in stitches. Iowamom, is right, though. Free Republic is not for the faint of heart (or is it feint of heart?). You'll learn soooo much being around here. Glad to have you on board!
You too, Supercat! Well done!
Thanks for the welcome to you and the others....
It will take me a little while to learn everyones nic's
Bare with me.....
I am a HUGE nerd, love politics and news.....
I'm not real familiar with all the tricks to posting links and all yet either, but I look forward to learning.....
Among the many thousands of words on FR accusing the 34 judges of wanting only to kill a woman they don't know while trying to deal with a difficult issue of law interwoven with intricate facts, I've never seen any recognition that there just might be more to the case than the advocates here post. It should be recognized as axiomatic that every case in litigation contains at least two sides to the controversy; often more. It is the role and duty of the courts to weigh, consider and examine the conflicting assertions of fact while applying the governing law to the facts that are more likely true; the preponderance of the evidence. To suggest that the courts of Florida are predisposed to effectuating the death of a person out of a corrupt and malicious spirit is not only absurd, it's obscene and contemptable. And to assert that appellate courts, all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, are in on the death fix is no less than outrageous. Courts are in the business of making hard decisions vis-a-vis placating the ideological polemics of a specific group.
Look, I'm not going to brand any of you as a troll if you've come on to honestly have discussion with us here who regard Terri's life as having worth, even in its debilitated condition. However, some FReepers just seem to want to get our ire up without really discussing anything. We've had our share of taunting by some of you, just as you feel that we've called y'all trolls. It works both ways. If you want to have legitimate discussion then do so. Don't be taken aback when we try to support our positions.
If you're just gonna do a countdown of days till Terri's feeding tube is removed, like some longtime Freepers have done on these threads, then I'll count you as a troublemaker and nothing more. If you want genuine give and take, then do it! There's no need to harass us! We truly have deeply felt convictions about trying to help Terri's family. I would do the same for any other of my countrymen that I thought were in danger of losing their life for no good reason. IMHO, our society is not doing enough to protect the vulnerable. Can you honestly stand by idly while someone is about to be murdered? My conscience won't let me.
You've got it!
Start off supporting your position by naming the 34 judges you speak of, and then I'll listen to what else you have to say. By name, please.
Blah, blah, blah....
I did not start out with the assumption that the court officials are corrupt. My Mom used to work for the Florida State Attorney's Office. I had great faith in the system, until I saw what a handful of corrupt officials are getting away with. The facts speak for themselves.
You have already identified yourself as a Florida lawyer and personal friend of the corrupt officials. You are biased. If you are as close to the situation as you claim, then you know the truth, and are trying to cover for your colleagues. Maybe you even have your hand in the pie. This much I know for sure: What you're saying is wrong. Very wrong! And what you said in another post, on another thread, is also very wrong. Morals are not subjective. You either have them, or you don't.
Furthermore, Judges have a tendency to protect their own, even when a colleague is VERY WRONG. Unfortunately it is a trait NOT unique to their profession.
The judges have decided on the result they want, even invalidating a law passed by the legislature and signed by the governor just because it conflicted with their ruling.
There is a way however. And that is to put a guard on her and defy the judges the way Andrew Jackson did. Judges will be dictators as long as they can dictate to all other branches of government. DEATH TO TYRRANY!
You think if Jeb sent in the Guard that George would send in the Army to remove them?
Do you want her as a precedent for everyone else?
these people are in a lot of beds together:
If this doesn't leave you scratching your head in confusion and wondering how this is happening in the year 2005 when our legal system is supose to be squeaki clean, you have no hair!
Judges are impartial, right? Not Judge George Greer, the judge that has ordered Terri Schiavo executed by starvation and dehydration, twice.
Our good ole boy judge has worked side by side as county commissioner with Barbara Sheen Todd (county commissioner) for eight years. Barbara Sheen Todd is on the board of, you guessed it, the hospice where Terri Schiavo is kept prisoner by her husband, Michael Schiavo, who lives with another woman that he has two children with.
Also, Judge Greer's fellow judge, Judge John Lenderman is the brother of Martha Lenderman, also on the, you got it, the same hospice board.
Our fine judge accepted as the basis of his rulings, the questionable testimony of Michael Schiavo that Terri would wish to be killed, yet Michael never stated this until after he had received the 1.2 million dollar settlement during which time he portrayed himself as a loving husband that just wanted to bring his wife home and take care of her.
The judge also accepted as the basis of his rulings, the "opinion" of a third doctor who is the brother of a close associate of George Felos, Michael Schiavo's right-to-kill attorney, and very significantly, former Chairman of, you got it again, the same hospice board, Hospice of the Florida Suncoast, which operates Woodside Hospice in Pinellas Park, Florida.
Still have some hair left? Let's see what we can do about that!
I found the above at HyScience-- lots of GREAT stuff there on the Terri Shiavo case....
Do you know how it is that Hitler was able to gain support for his agendas? I did a little research. I thought I would share this bit of info:
During the same period that Hitler decreed the Rhineland sterilizations, a German medical economist pointed out, in an article entitled 'The Fight Against Degeneration,' that the care of a deaf-mute or cripple cost 6 marks a day, that of a reform school inmate 4.85 marks, and that of a mentally ill or deficient person 4.50 marks. The average earnings of a laborer, on the other hand, were only 2.50 marks, and those of a civil servant 4 marks daily. (The exchange rate at the time was about forty cents -- 2.50 marks to the dollar.) The economist lamented: 'The state spends far more for the existence of these actually worthless compatriots than for the salary of a healthy man, who must bring up a healthy family,' and hinted that it was too bad that a more radical program than sterilization could not be employed.
Then, instead of coming out and just legalizing the killing of these people, he just...............Legalized it. He wrote this on his personal stationary:
ADOLF HITLER
Berlin, 1 September 1939
Reichsleiter Bouhler andDr. med. Brandt
are instructed to broaden the powers of physicians designated by name, who will decide whether those who have - as far as can be humanly determined - incurable illnesses can, after the most careful evaluation, be granted a mercy death.
/signed/ Adolf Hitler
Between December 1939 and August 1941, about 50,000 to 60,000 Germans children and adults were secretly killed by lethal injections or in gassing installations designed to look like shower stalls. It was a foretaste of Auschwitz. The victims were taken from the medical institution and put to death....
Never to Forget - New York:HarperCollins, 1976
I have more...
Should I keep going??
Let me ask you a few simple questions. Please try to answer them without getting side-tracked.
(1) Judge Greer has had a motion pending before him since 2002 challenging Michael Schiavo's guardianship. Why do you suppose that in over two years Judge Greer hasn't found time to schedule it?
(2) Michael Schiavo and his doctors testified, prior to receiving a "malpractice" award, that his wife's prognosis was good and that he would help her get better. Immediately after receiving the award, he discontinued and forbade all attempts at therapy. Only after Michael met overtly-pro-Euthenasia lawyer(*) did he "remember" that when his wife saw a movie about Karen Ann Quinlan, she expressed a wish not to live "hooked up to tubes". Would a reasonable person given those facts find Michael's testimony about his wife's "expressed wishes" credible?
(*)Google "Litigation as spiritual practice", the title of George Felos' book, if you think the characterization is unfair.
(3) Karen Ann Quinlan, the person whose case Terri had allegedly alluded to, was hooked up to the ventilator at the time of her court battle. After her parents lost and she was disconnected from the ventilator, she did not die in minutes as predicted, but lived on for years because she was allowed to receive air on her own. Would a desire to not to be "hooked up to tubes" [assuming Terri ever said such a thing] represent a desire to be killed, or a desire to receive therapy so that she could live without anything 'artificial'?
(4) At the time Terri made her alleged statement, the very notion of denying food and water to someone who would otherwise starve or dehydrate would have been considered so grossly unacceptable as to be beyond consideration. Would a reasonable person consider it plausible that what Terri really meant to say was "...and if the Florida legislature should pass a statute sometime while I'm incapacitated that redefines the term 'life supprot' to include food and water, I'd like you to deny those so that I'm fatally and painfully dehydrated?
People are accusing Greer of corruption because he makes rulings that no reasonable person could make. If you disagree with my judgements of what's "reasonable", please explain why.
You guys don't like the messenger, but the message is the truth.
would you take care of her in your home?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.