Gov. Jeb Bush Speaking At 3PM EST [Schiavo]

FoxNews | 3-23-2005

[utahagen]

I love it! People who believe "for better or for worse" really means that are "selfish". I would never leave my husband just because he's severely disabled. I would never shack up with another guy and have kids out of wedlock while my husband lies in a hospital, just because I want to. THAT would be selfish. As for "putting your morals onto somebody else"...what's a moral relativist doing on Free Republic? Go over to DU and you'll be happy to find many people who believe the only moral is that you should make yourself happy. Over here on Free Republic, we have higher standards, perhaps because we're following standards drafted a long time ago and carved on two stone tablets...

[utahagen]

God, please let this be this case. Please keep Teri strong and please let the DCF grab her tonight.

[utahagen]

Good point. Michael Schiavo wants to eat his cake and have it, too.

[supercat]

That's bull..that's putting your morals onto somebody else. I don't believe any 24 year old woman would expect their husband to stand by their bed everyday, indefinitely when every diagnosis is that she will not recover.

No, but I don't think a woman would want to have the husband prevent others (her loving family) from doing so. The family has told Michael he should divorce Terri and they wouldn't fight it. He refuses.

Suppose I tell my friend I can buy a widget for him for $100 at a membership club. My friend gives me $100, and I go to the club and find widgets are not $120 each.

Which of the following actions would be honorable or dishonorable:

1. I cough up $20 of my own money, and buy a widget for my friend. I obviously keep the friend's $100.
2. I don't buy the widget, but give my friend back the $100.
3. I don't buy the widget, but keep the $100 anyway.

If Michael wanted to remain a faithful husband, that would have been extremely honorable. If, because of circumstances he hadn't expected, he didn't want to do that, though, he should dissolve the marriage (equivalent to giving up the $100). To refuse to honor his vows and yet also refuse to dissolve the marriage is simply craven.

[snarkytart]

See I would trust the nurses(plural) who were with her 8 to 10 hours a day for months.
You need to be around someone in Terry's state for a long periods of time over weeks and months to get a good idea of her real condition.

A court appointed guardian by Greer, who is an obvious kook as we have seen by his actions this evening , is not good enough to me.

[conservativebabe]

Exactly! So, then the question becomes, why is he not willing to do so? What are his motives?

[freecopper01]

Hildy,

If you believe, that I feel pity for you. I would expect that. If I had my life to live again, and that happened, yes, I would expect that.

AND my husband would expect that of me.

For richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health. Those are very serious words.

If you do not believe that you and yours may indeed have many interesting problems of trust within your marriage.

So Sorrowful, I am, for you.

[Hildy]

He's a kook because he doesn't agree with you. Well, there are more kooks than not out there then, I guess.

[conservativebabe]

Further, if some want to make a "sanctity of marriage" argument, we cannot say we value that only if both parties are healthy, walking, talking, individuals.

[Protect the Bill of Rights]

I am sure you did not mean it that way, but please don't dump on the nurses. In any setting they know more than the doctors, lawyers and all of the chiefs.

They are her caregivers 24 hours a day. I believe them because in my professional experience, the doctors know because I tell them so. It is from the information I and every other floor monkey give them, they decide on a course of treatment.

Again, I believe them and I believe what they said was ignored by the powers that be. (but that is my opinion)

[supercat]

Further, if some want to make a "sanctity of marriage" argument, we cannot say we value that only if both parties are healthy, walking, talking, individuals.

Michael has openly renounced his marriage vows. I see no reason for Terri to be bound by vows Michael has renounced.

[supercat]

Exactly! So, then the question becomes, why is he not willing to do so? What are his motives?

To cover up attempted murder, among other things.

[monkeywrench]

I read the report. He used the same jargon as the Hemlock Society. Poor Terri had the deck stacked against her.

[freecopper01]

I beg to differ with you on this, I believe Hildy said it exactly as she meant it. Which is why there may be issues of trust.

Sad.

[Protect the Bill of Rights]

Just heard a report order was issued by court to prevent DFCS from taking custody.

If I was Jeb, I'd take her myself & tell him to stick it as I carried her out the door.

[snarkytart]

So this is still up to the court.
I thought Jeb said he had the right to take her into custody!!!
What is happening here?

[nmh]

"The bad news is they will have to appear before him in four business days from when they take custody."

As long as they don't have to WAIT four days BEFORE they take custody of her then I'd worry about standing before Lucifer later. I just want her to have a chance to live.

I can't help but wonder about the permanent damage that maybe resulting from this hideous starvation and if she will survive all this pussy footing around..


Best Regards

[Protect the Bill of Rights]

Yeah, her and everyone else...nurses are stupid I guess.

[utahagen]

i think the DCF isn't bound by that.

[freecopper01]

WHICH court???? Greer's?

No surprise if so.

If other, which???