Posted on 03/07/2005 9:47:56 AM PST by EveningStar
Alan Keyes is scheduled to appear on Michael Medved's show today to discuss the Terry Schiavo case. Medved frequently disagrees with Keyes, but not on this topic. According to the RenewAmerica site, Keyes will be appearing in the second hour of Michael's show which is broadcast live 3-6 Eastern / Noon-3 Pacific. Here is a list of stations where you can hear Michael's show. You can also hear him live on the web.
I can't believe that I'm actually posting a Keyes thread.
Thanks starman.
Difficult decision - what are the alternatives. Live in a horrible condition or spend eternity with your heavenly father. I would guess the latter.
My daughter and I discussed this and decided we would rather go then spend all these years in a bed in this condition.
I agree with you. I just think Keyes's principles overrule his social tact.
ppping
Oh, an additional thought...I think the main reason Keyes lost by a large margin was because there was so much lead time before the debates with Obama. Most people didn't watch them because they already had Keyes pegged as some nut, but he wiped the floor with Obama almost as throughly as he did with Dershowitz.
Thanks for the info.
Terri ping! If anyone would like to be added to or removed from my Terri ping list, please let me know by FReepmail!
| | |
No offense, but I am certain that you know very little about this case.
You see, the debate is not whether Terri is in a "terrible condition" or whether she should go to God, because the reason her parents want guardianship is because she has been denied therapy that could help her get out of her terrible condition. This therapy showed promising signs in the early going (before hubby got the big malpractice settlement) and further therapy was recommended, but her husband ordered all therapy stopped a few months after he got the money.
And take this para, from an op-ed I wrote on the case last week:
Second, Michael Schiavo has been acting so weird he makes Hunter S. Thompson look like Joe Friday. If we believe his court testimony, the timeline goes like this: Some years prior to Terri’s collapse she told him that she would never want to “live on a machine” or be a burden. Yet in 1992, his lawyer told a jury Michael might need enough money to take care of her for another half-century. Michael proclaimed from the witness stand that he would become a nurse and take care of her “for the rest of [his] life.” By 1993, he had stopped rehabilitation (which was showing promising results), had put a “Do not resuscitate” order in her chart, tried to deny her antibiotic treatment for an infection, melted down her wedding ring and euthanized her cats. In other words, he ignored what she said about being a burden, then swore in court to take on the burden, but decided a few months later it was too much of a burden.If that were your daughter, would you want that guy "taking care" of her? Would you trust him when he said there was no hope, and that he was following her wishes? Note that the facts I presented in that para were from the court transcripts, stuff either he or his lawyer said in the courtroom.
Yet another time I find myself surprised by Alan Dershowitz. As I said in an earlier post, 95% of the time he's wrong, but when he's right, baby he is RIGHT!
That said, I'm not sure that a family should leave someone alive when there's no hope, but since that's not the case here and it would be none of my bloody business, I'll not worry about it.
I don't disagree with you but you are noting 1992 issues, this is 2005 and a lot of time, conditions and legions of doctors assisting have come and gone.
I only noted I would not want to spend 15 year like this and would prefer to spend time in heaven. And, as I noted in discussing this my my daughter, she said the same.
Bump!
I love Medved and Keyes. Should be a great program.
Yes, I understand that, but my point was that there are not only two options. Therapy was working, and the legions of doctors you mentioned are divided. There's not one reason--not one--that therapy shouldn't be tried again, or that it should have been stopped in 1993. If you or your daughter were in this condition, I would hope your family would see three choices, not two.
I don't know if I would make it if I greased my own skids either.
I believe generally you are right however I have not seen the family sue to start the therapy - only to keep the feeding tube.
Was that Keyes who answered your son's questions?
And we all know the MSM hates Keyes largely because he is a Christian conservative, in the best meaning of both words. I'll take that over the ability to "make the press sit up and beg at press conferences" anyday.
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.