I don't know Michael Schiavo from Adam, I'm not prepared to judge him. But the bottom line is, that in the absence of a living will, we should err on the side of life. Maybe today Terri can't be cured, what about 5-10 years from now. If she can still breathe on her own, and her parents are willing to pay for her care, what's the problem? Some say that she won't suffer due to starvation. If that's the case, then she is isn't suffering now with the feeding tube, right? Again, why the rush to kill her?
You and I are in complete agreement, and this is the point I was trying to make earlier. Let's argue from this (or a similar) position and not resort to accusations against Mr. Schiavo, etc.
A logical, practical and analytical question that the "let Terri die" side will not face much less answer. It is the proof that their position is the knee-jerk emotional position.