Posted on 03/19/2005 11:30:38 AM PST by Ravi
Just heard on Fox that U.S. Senate will convene today in emergency session regarding Terri Schiavo.
I have a question for everybody. If we have no right to decide who lives and dies under any circumstance, what justifies anyone being sent out to the battlefield if they don't want to go?
Conscientious objection which needs to be fine tuned under our new system of an all-volunteer military.
But we had a draft years ago. My point is that we send people into war to die. That's just a fact. How do we justify it?
Another day, another argument. Since you seem to like a good debate, I'm posing this question. .. if no man has the right to decide the fate of another human being, how do we justify sending young, healthy men and women onto the battlefield to die?
This is a horrific story and the after death photos of Lisa prior to autopsy are TESTAMENT to the brutal and horrific, BARBARIC, death this type of killing involves.
You can find the pics of Lisa on the closed (to posting) Terri Schiavo March 2005 thread that got so long it had to be closed and begun again.
I think it is post 5433 but it could be 4533...at any rate....you will never be the same after reading about the scientologists htq down there right by Terri, the WORLD HTQ...at that, some 10,000 strong, they OWN 49% of clearwater real estate, and they are now the lawyers, the boy scout leaders the community leaders and THEY DO NOT BELIEVE IN GOD. NOR IN JESUS. They believe in reaching your own potential thru audits that get rid of what is wrong with you (to the tune of 1000 BIG ONES an hour) and they also believe that the seriously DISABLED have failed to reach their potential and secretly wish to DIE!
Enter Terri.
Allowing for aging, it struck me that she looks much more responsive in the picture in the Florida paper early on with her husband lovingly hovering over her than she does after all these years of whatever treatment or non-treatment she has received.
I don't know what was done in California, but considered the possibility that it was experimental surgery which may have worsened her condition because something could have gone awry, and that affected subsequent decisions . . .
The opposition is throwing brickbats at the Schindlers for resorting to professionals whose credentials have been called into question. What about the credentials of the person(s) who performed the procedure in California?
The problem is do we or anybody have the right to terminate their lives, whether or not they left a living will? Legally we do if they have a written directive; morally I'm no longer sure about that any more.
So, would you be a concientious objector if drafted or are you against the military because it is forced to make these kinds of choices?
Terry cannot have an MRI. Michael even had experimental surgery performed which implanted electrodes in her brain to stimulate brain activity. Anyone with those electrodes is unable to have an MRI.
I don't debate with Arabs intent on murdering Jews.
I wonder why are they so evil they must murder young Jewish children for their terrorist aims, but I don't debate with them.
So now you're angry at Michael Schiavo for trying to do something? It was experimental. When you're that far gone, you'll try anything. My brother had Cancer and went to an experimental place in Texas because there was a small chance it would help him. It made him worse. His condition worsened and he died a little while later. So, what's your point? You can't have it both ways. You can't say, he didn't do everything and then say what he did was wrong. At her stage, it's mostly a crapshoot. But we do it because there's a chance. But like my Brother, he knew when there was no chance left and was left to die with dignity. But unlike Ms. Schiavo, he wasn't at the mercy of people who wouldn't allow him to make those choices. You'll say, that Terri's will to live shows. I'm saying she doesn't know any better because she has no cognitive reasoning. We'll never agree on that, I guess.
I have no idea why you keep saying this. But I guess because you can't answer my question, it's just easier to resort to this crazy thing you keep bringing up. Since af_vet_1981 won't explain what he means, can any of you other mind readers explain it to me?
Natural death has been interrupted, and this is OK in cases where the patient has the smallest of chances to recover at least a portion of awareness and life's gifts.
In this gals case, it is barbaric to allow her to exist like this.
If a miracle is to occur, it would have occurred or will occur before she passes. What I see is the highest form of human selfishness imaginable, being portrayed for all to see.
I don't understand why others cannot sense this.I really don't. That is what I see.:
What you don't see is that life is a gift from our God. It would be a sin to discard that gift as if it were nothing.
To take life in such an instance as this would be akin to appointing oneself as God. Anyone remember last time that happened to a certain angel who is now a fallen angel?
If Terri wanted to die, she could will herself to die. If she isn't capable of willing herself to die then she's probably ok and lost in whatever dreams may come to her.
We know as much about what Terri and those like her are going through as we do about what a person goes through after death.
Who is to say that someone in her condition, if they aren't capable of higher thinking or "to recover at least a portion of awareness and life's gifts" isn't already experiencing a small slice of heaven? Maybe in her mind she is back when she was a child with loving family and friends? Maybe she is already with God and in heaven in her mind?
Those with Alzheimers might look pitiful to us but who is to say that *they* aren't in a happy place and already experiencing a bit of heaven in their minds? Back with their loved ones in their minds? Back in happy times. I believe that Terri is responding and is NOT a vegetable.
I could never ask my husband, mother, father or kids to become a murderer. That's very very selfish to ask of loved ones.
EXCELLENT QUESTION, Hildy!!
Notice how nobody has actually ventured to answer it. I really am curious to see what others have to say. I'm not trying to be confrontational. I just want to know what everyone thinks.
You made you point with a bit of sarcasm, but you also pointed out some very sad truths.
Yes, I believe they are all wrong. ALL of them, including Bush. It is a damn shame, but they will discover, I hope, that they were misled.
If not, we have a crisis of major proportion in the RNC.
Which in a normal court would not be allowed
Moral equivalency??
The same way that we also put murderers and other criminals to death.
You're comparing apples to oranges. What is going on with Terri is entirely different from our soldiers and both are entirely different from murderers and other violent criminals.
"ERGO: this is no "executive power(s)" possible in a republic/democracy"
That's quite a rant to say little. The President obviously has executive powers but he doesn't have executive powers such that for example he can tell Purpleland where your children can go to school. As I said, it's not a monarchy. The president can't just make people do things because that's what he wants. Would you like him to be able to dictate things like that to you? Maybe you should move to China.
You likely won't get any "takers," for you "excellent "?"
WOW...I didn't expect this...so you're saying there are instances where man can make the decision who lives and who dies. And to equate murderers on death row and young innocent men and women is frankly, insulting.
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.