Replies

"Can you accept that there is distortion on both sides?

Yes. What I have trouble accepting is the fact that this is being portrayed as a "right to die" scenario (whatever that means), but Ms. Schiavo wasn't dying. Not even in the beginning of this whole ugly mess.

To err on the side of life is infinitely more likely to stand up under God's judgement than assuming something not really proven. It's like abortion in the "first trimester" (or second or third...). When I've asked pro-abortion women how they determine the exact moment that the first ends and the second begins, their response is shakey and evasive. So how do you determine exactly when an act's consequences become certain?

Besides, Bastardo Schiavo (sorry) has refused divorce, a million dollars and other "outs" to simply turn Terry over to the people who love her without limit. In the United States, we take care of our helpless. We don't toss them in the trash heap - especially when someone is stepping up to the plate to take complete responsibility.

Allow me one more response: I had a cat who came down with cancer. It was proved to me by the vet that she was suffering terribly (as in PAIN), and there was no recovery possible. The decision I made was based on those facts, and it was a hard one.

I opted to hold her during the euthanasia, so she would not die alone or with strangers. I am still not over that, no matter how justified the decision. It's just not as simple as an "up-or-down vote" -it's the infinite value of life that reaches inside of you, even if it's a pet. I wouldn't want to bear the weight of ending the life of a human without the full wieght of all that is holy backing me up.

There is something unholy taking place here, and I won't acquiesce to "experts" who don't seem troubled by the same issues.