Posted on 03/25/2005 5:01:12 PM PST by Wolfstar
All the folks saying starvation is good for you really ought to get out there and demonstrate it for us.
So, in other words, you are talking through your hat.
Mercy killing and suicide is being promoted as being normal and OK. The future for elder care?
What you say is quite fair. However, the point is this: Terri Schiavo is going to die very soon in all likelihood. Then what? Does everyone just walk away? Do they lash out in willy nilly in all directions, blaming anyone and everyone from the husband all the way up to the POTUS? Was this really just about the Terri Schiavo soap opera, or about the legal and medical issues highlighted by this case? Were people really worked up about principles? If so, the principles far transcend this one case.
Don't be silly.
Passion for the many is an abstraction. As individuals, not groups, have rights, the best way so address the needs of the many is to regard the individual's problems like a canary in a mine-- a warning that there are undoubtably other problems. And maybe one reason we don't hear about them is that it costs a million dollars to pay for the legal costs.
Interestingly, from this article one can conclude that, per federal law, one cannot pull a feeding tube unless clear and convincing evidence is available that the affected person would wish it to be pulled under the circumstances. I don't think most people would agree that Terri's husband's interested hearsay testimony constitutes clear and convincing evidence. I know that per legal technicalities his testimony is not regarded as hearsay, but give me a break: society has watered down the marriage contract to such an extent that no one can seriously regard his testimony as anything but virtual hearsay.
That has been my "song" here for years.
You need to put in some inflection marks in your posting.
I can't tell if it is dripping with sarcasm or straight.
Clear and convincing evidence can be a co-worker or two from about ten years ago, as happened when they wanted to kill Nancy Cruzan.
This is the lead paragraph from a Washington Times article, March 24, 2005.
"Terri Schiavo's medical condition is not particularly rare -- an estimated 30,000 to 45,000 patients in the United States are being kept alive in persistent vegetative states through feeding tubes."
Here is the link: washingtontimes.com
Do you need publicity to activate your religious or moral outrage if you think removing a feeding tube is wrong? If you either don't understand the question, or have no answer for it, what can I say.
Parents don't want the publicity. They want their daughter alive.
If you aren't aware, the care Terri is getting does not require a facility at all.
She gets nothing that couldn't be done at home.
It doesn't require any special education, just some minimal training on feeding tubes .
Many, many parents do it for their kids at home.
guard·i·an n.
1. One that guards, watches over, or protects.
2. Law. One who is legally responsible for the care and management of the person or property of an incompetent or a minor.
Funny but I don't see someone who can have you killed because they feel like it in that definition.
Perhaps the powers of guardians need to be looked into.
This statement is inane.
Are you capable of raising your eyes from one case and considering the broader issues highlighted by it?
Yes, a lot of people will walk away from this story when she dies. You can probably watch leave them on foxnews.
This isnt an issue in every case. In fact, there has been an explosion of people inquiring about living wills this week.
It simply will not be an across the board protest movement about however many cases you say exist. It is fact dependent, and only becomes a public issue when a controversy arises.
Not me. See the link to the Washington Times article I posted in #152.
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.