Posted on 03/20/2005 9:03:19 AM PST by XR7
A note to the news media: Stop lying about Terri Schiavo!
I have a message for the media: Stop, already! Just stop it!!Stop saying that Terri Schiavo is "a brain-dead woman being kept alive solely on life support." She is not. She's a disabled Florida woman, who is now being murdered by medical personnel who have removed her feeding tube.
Aaarghh!!! Tell the truth! Stop saying this is about her right to die. Watch closely at the words coming out of this keyboard: T-E-L-L T-H-E T-R-U-T-H.
Terri Schiavo is not at all comatose. She is not at all on life support. She does not have a breathing tube or a respirator. She simply has been receiving her food and water — something everyone in existence needs to survive — through a tube.
What's more, though she is disabled, she probably could eat by herself — it's just too much trouble for hospital personnel to try to feed her by hand.
That's the key element here: Terri is inconvenient. She's especially inconvenient to her husband, Michael, for several reasons — not the least of which is that he's living with another woman and has children by her. Can anyone seriously trust he is operating in her best interest?
Tell the truth. The case of Terri Schiavo doesn't represent the right to die. It represents the right to live.
When murderers are sentenced to death, it comes as a result of a jury or judge passing sentence on a defendant who is sitting before them. One who has had the right to make a defense, to call witnesses and to testify for themselves, if they so choose.
But Terri Schiavo, this woman who has been incapacitated for more than a decade, has never had the right to do any of that. What's more, Judge George W. Greer, the Florida judge who seems bent on ending her life — who has more than once ordered her food and water removed — has never even seen Terri Schiavo in person.
Never seen her in person! It is inconceivable that a judge would pass judgment on a felon without ever having seen the defendant.
But then, that's the point, isn't it? If I am to believe the mainstream media — either this is about Terri's "right to die" or she, in some sense, deserves to die. After all, she's got no "quality of life," right?
Wrong. Terri is not a criminal defendant. She committed no crime. She is innocent. Her sole "crime" — and I say that with all the irony I can muster — is that she is disabled.
If anything, this case is about the rights of the disabled.
Make no mistake, "quality of life" and comfort are not the prime considerations for living, any more than parenting is about spending "quality time" with kids. Forget quality time. If you don't spend "quantity time" with children, that's when they appear to suffer, if we are to believe the research. And if a disabled person is going to be killed because he or she is "inconvenient," let's stop talking about his or her quality of life. The quality of life while being starved and dehydrated to death is nonexistent.
Let's talk about the death process for Terri if her feeding tube is not reinserted. After three or four days, she will have lost weight and will have begun to lose normal body secretions. Her mouth will begin to look dry and her eyes will appear sunken. She will look thinner because her body tissues will have lost fluid. Her heart rate will gradually go up, and her blood pressure will gradually go down.
Five to 10 days from now, her alertness will decrease markedly. Breathing will become irregular with periods of very fast and then very slow breathing.
From day 10 until death — first coma, then kidney function will decline and toxins will begin accumulating in her body. Those toxins will cause her respiratory muscles to fail. Then multiple organ systems will begin to fail from lack of nutrition.
Then, and only then, she will die.
Sure. You're right, mainstream media. That's exactly what Terri has a "right" to. That's exactly what she would have wanted.
Excuse me while I vomit.
LINK to article: http://family.org/cforum/fnif/commentary/a0035918.cfm
At no point did I jump on the side of Terri's husband thank you very much. I simply agreed that "I" wouldn't want to be kept alive in Terri's situation. I happen to disagree wholeheartedly with her husbands actions and believe he is a murderer. May God have mercy on your twisting soul
"How many Freepers would want to sustained in Terry' condition by well-meaning family members?"
The thing is that in this case they can just ask her. The judge could do that, but he has never seen her.
I aplogize if my comments were misrepresented. I do not agree with what is being done to Terri!!! I just agreed with the comment one FReeper made stating he wouldnt want to be kept alive in Terri's postion. Michael is a murderer!!
"At no point did I jump on the side of Terri's husband thank you very much."
MMM-Hmm.
"Please keep in mind that this has been an ongoing legal battle that began prior to him having children with his new girlfriend and that Terri's parents encouraged him to move on."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1366686/posts?page=25#25
Of course you left out what I had replied to.
A "husband" should not retain the right as spouse to decide life and death matters when he is clearly living as though he were married to another woman. You can't have two wives (yet).
Bob Schindler has said under oath that he encouraged Michael Schiavo to date other women. Do you think that was wrong of him?
You claimed you didn't defend him.
Your post most certainly did.
Thank you for playing.
Of course you left out what I had replied to.
Here is what I replied to.
A "husband" should not retain the right as spouse to decide life and death matters when he is clearly living as though he were married to another woman. You can't have two wives (yet).
Bob Schindler has said under oath that he encouraged Michael Schiavo to date other women. Do you think that was wrong of him?
Honey do you mean a court can starve us to death at will?
Repeating it to yourself doesn't make it anymore truthful than it already isn't.
Besides, talking to yourself is a sign of impending mental collapse.
Pleae attempt to see the whole picture
Please don't lie.
He was already dating other women.
That wasnt my comment it was from the post I was replying to. I was trying to show why I had made a comment. I know he was already dating other women
Fox News just showed video of Terri responding with sounds to her father.
"At no point did I jump on the side of Terri's husband thank you very much." Your post 61 in this thread.
"Please keep in mind that this has been an ongoing legal battle that began prior to him having children with his new girlfriend and that Terri's parents encouraged him to move on."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1366686/posts?page=25#25
That isn't taking the side of Mikey?
Please dont lie? If you can read, please see the original post I was replying to. Thank you for your concern
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1366686/posts?page=25#13
honey, I mean the phrase "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" does not appear in the Constitution.
You claimed you didn't defend Mikey.
You did.
Forgive me for being a dink?
sure.
and that'd be "Declaration of Independence" not the BoR
;)
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.