Posted on 03/22/2005 3:26:06 AM PST by tsmith130
Agreed.
Really? How did she look on your last visit?
Okay I meant her heart stopped due to abnormal heart rythm caused by chemical imbalance.
I understand, and I know the place of which you speak about freezing over, and it ain't a shallow lake in northern Canada.
Every MSM network and every liberal politician down here would love nothing more than seeing Fox go belly up. But the more they knock it, the bigger it grows.
Anyhow, thank God for the internet and especially Free Republic, the truth is just a mouse click away, any where on earth.
You are willfully ignoring the facts dave.
Well, thanks for revealing what's in your soul........or not.
When you get inside the people who think it's fine and dandy to kill this woman, you find a black hole.
(And a whole lot of ignorance, as well).
No further discussion with you is necessary.
Good point.
Greer: What I have written, I have written
Amen to that, Jeff. I am appalled and ashamed that our legal system sees this case as a "right to die with dignity" case, not a case about the right to life. How "dignified" is it to perish from slow starvation and dehydration? Plus I don't understand why Terri's husband-in-name-only (he hasn't been her real husband for years) gets the sole say in this matter, over the anguished pleas of her own family. This case simply sickens me; I feel so ashamed for our legal system right now. I do not see how any of this honors the Constitution.
It's the making brain = person fallacy. If you do that, then once you are brain damaged, to kill the person is just taking out the trash.
Wrong and evil.
If you don't like the laws, then have them changed. Everything that's been done in this case has been done by the letter of the law.
As to your initial comments...in the absence of a legal instrument there must be compelling evidence that she in fact wanted this in these particular circumstances. There is none, there is only hearsay.
...and it's hearsay about different circumstances...mainly about full life support which she does not need.
Sorry, but the fundamental moral principle upon which our soociety and our liberty rests is an absoulte respect for and deference to innocent life. Terri is that. Her husband and those seeking her death are not only opposed by her direct family, whose only interest is her well being (unlike Michael's), but there are just as many doctors on the other side of the issue...which the court will not allow. In such circumstances, every fiber of decency, virtue and moral responsibility cries out to err on the side of life...which is what should happen in this case.
Again...do as thorough a study of Terri's side of the arguement and then compare them objectively.
For me, if she had a living will, or even if the entire family agreed that these were her wishes, there would be no question (even though death by starvation and dehydration is a bad, horrible way to go, regardless of what pundits say)...but that is not the case.
Boy, you are a wonder physician. You can make diagnoses without seeing the patients. You are a physician, of course, or you wouldn't even try to make such an assertion.
^^^^^^
You are correct, it is not illegal if you recognize bigamy.
It is not bigamy - he has not married this "other woman."
It is immoral in every sense of the word, but not illegal.
As far as I'm concerned, Michael Sciavo is scum. He is among the lowest form of life on two legs, but he has not done anything illegal -- at least nothing that can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
The "court of public opinion" does not get a say here; it is in the hands of the 11th Circuit. Period.
I don't care what was alleged to have been said, when you see her face brighten in a really adorable way when her mom or dad speaks to her, or to see her actually laugh when her dad teases her you think, you just think how she would react to a walk in the park or a funny movie and you know this is a crock of crap.
Tell you what.
I'll strap you to a basketball pole for a week by your neck and decide if you can feel anything, waiting for a judge to decide if HE wants to feed you.
How do "know" what she's feeling?
You're making blind statements based on your prejudices because you (1) either want her dead.
Or (2) hate pro-life forces more than you want one innocent to live, to TRY to get therapy, and to SEE WHAT happens when a prejudiced judge and a hate-filled "husband" ISN'T keeping help from the lady.
Give her a chance with real doctors, give her some love, attention, and therapy - and let's see what happens.
See 894
"Yhe fundamental moral principle upon which our soociety and our liberty rests is an absoulte respect for and deference to innocent life. Terri is that. Her husband and those seeking her death are not only opposed by her direct family, whose only interest is her well being (unlike Michael's), but there are just as many doctors on the other side of the issue...which the court will not allow. In such circumstances, every fiber of decency, virtue and moral responsibility cries out to err on the side of life...which is what should happen in this case."
Every thing that defines common sense and decency cries out to save Terri at this point. It is heart wrenching and agaonizing to see so many of our institutions and so many of our own free people turning a deaf, deluded ear to that cry.
Every person in this country should be shaking in his boots about this murder.
Guard your dear Downs' Syndrome children, put a fortress around your father who has Alzheimers, don't let culture of death 'Doctors' anywhere near a loved one who has been injured in an automobile accident.
If this is OK, what's next??
We need to be in deep prayer about the future of this nation. We are on a dark, dark path......
Lord, have mercy on us!
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.