Posted on 04/01/2005 8:05:46 PM PST by FairOpinion
Absurd.
Perhaps you should go back and read what I actually said instead of assigning me those positions you feel most comfortable attacking.
Just a suggestion.
It is merely a factual statement. The faction, that you represent, was in favor of killing Terri Schiavo. What the hell should I call it?
I NEVER said I was "in favor of killing Terri Schiavo".
IN FACT I said that if it was up to me I could NOT have made the decision to remove her feeding tube.
I would have prefered to transfer custody to the parents.
HOWEVER I don't know how I would have felt after seeing a loved one trapped in this state for 15 years and I am not ready to condemn the husband.
And for all I know he WAS carrying out Terri's final wishes.
You need to actually read posts and comprehend what people's positions ARE before making accusations.
You said that a PVS patient could "suffer". That it was absurd to say a PVS patient couldn't "suffer". That is what you said. If you are backing away from that now, I don't blame you.
I NEVER said I was "in favor of killing Terri Schiavo".
No, you simply vigorously spent dozens of posts defending the decision to kill her.
I am not ready to condemn the husband.
Ok. Fair enough. Meanwhile, I am. I condemn him as the creepy, cruel, ghoulish pr*ck that he is. So, you've stated your opinion & I've stated mine.
Anything else?
You really need to attempt to format your posts so that readers can tell the difference between the comments you are responding to and your own statements.
The way you post, everything just runs together in one big incoherant mess.
Just a suggestion.
Yes well, most of the incoherant mess is what you posted!
Everybody knows that I am pro life, not for killing mentally deprived persons. Not for leaving them to starve and thirst to death, which the likes of you seem to approve of.
700 posted on 04/04/2005 10:05:16 PM EDT by Jorge
Ann Coulter would correct you (as she corrected a NY Times writer--her correction is seen in the special features on the DVD " Is it true what they say about Ann?")
She would argue that your phrase the hoi polloi is a bit redundant since "hoi" is the definite article for "polloi". That is, "hoi" already means "the". So you can simply refer to "hoi polloi".
Then, again, no big deal. It could be viewed as idiomatic, so maybe it should be given a pass.
But i WILL ask you to keep your word that your post #667 is "an opus"---YOUR opus.
Looks like nearly all the OPUS-OUT crowd of late are folks that always eschewed "Conservatism's Dark Side"...lol...as they put it.
They are nearly all social libs or moderates....which is their choice.
I think the TS affair which thankfully missed pushed them in a direction they've always wanted to go rather than being an epiphany.
My quote and your response to it appear as a single statement in one paragraph, with nothing separating them.
Your posts are almost unintelligible as a result.
Are you doing this on purpose?
If you don't know how to format posts, all you have to do is look at how other Freepers do it and copy them.
Nice try but I'm not backing away from my previous statement one bit.
Even if the medical community consensus is that a PVS patient can't suffer, I believe this is in a limited context.
Yes, maybe a PVS patient won't feel or respond to normal pain stimuli, but they remained trapped in that body.
I believe a person has a soul and is in there, aware on levels we know nothing about, and yes COULD and probably DOES suffer in some manner.
Amazing. So in other words, forget the actual scientific basis for the entire case, you supported ending her life partially because your personal metaphysical theories told you that she "COULD and probably DOES suffer", based on zero evidence or accepted scientific fact whatsoever.
Remind me again which side contains the religious zealots?
If you actually believe what you are saying here, then in fact you are not taking the legal basis for killing Terri Schiavo seriously. You have invented your own basis for killing a person and it is based entirely on pie in the sky metaphysics.
Again, it's fine and dandy for you to believe these things personally, but when the ramifications are the death of an innocent person, one would hope you would examine the beliefs more seriously and apply them in a more sober way. When you make it plain that you are ok with killing people because of some unprovable metaphysical stuff you "believe", don't be surprised when others get alarmed and disturbed and call you on it. They are right to do so.
The MSM isn't dead yet. They scored a big one here. While we were spending our energy trying to save Terri, they were spending theirs convincing the world that she was brain dead. As a result, they have Frist and 55 (count 'em) pathetic Republican Senators on the run. They are tasting blood. Watch out.
Where did I say I supported ending her life?
I said that I probably could not have removed her feeding tube, but didn't know how I would feel after seeing her in this state for 15 years.
AND I do understand the right to personal end of life decisions such as this, and am not willing to judge the husband.
Remind me again which side contains the religious zealots?
All I said is that I believe God created people as living SOULS and that they continue to exist as such, EVEN as a PVS patient.
You call that being a "zealot"?
What on earth are you talking about?
Do you even read posts before you pound out these responses?
Except you also said that, you imagine, such a person "suffers". Which is what started our latest little back and forth, of which I grow extremely weary.
I know full well that I'm going to be flamed for this, but I learned long ago that I am driven to do what is morally right regardless of the opinions of others concerning my actions.
First, a little about myself: When I made the fundamental ideological choices which led me to choose the Republican party, we still had troops in 'Nam. Nixon was still in office, gasoline cost $0.33 a gallon, and most Americans had never heard the words "Watergate" or "OPEC", and I was one of the vanishingly small number of fundamentalist Christians NOT voting for Democrats. The GOP has changed a lot in thirty years, and not all of that change has been for the better.
Concerning the polls surrounding the Schiavo case: contrary to several thousand posts on this blog alone, the vast majority of liberals never "wanted Mrs. Schiavo dead". The vast majority of AMERICANS, from either side of the aisle, felt overwhelmingly that it was NONE OF THEIR DARNED BUSINESS! And they felt even more strongly that it was singularly NOT THE BUSINESS OF THE US CONGRESS.
All of the earlier polls asked variations on: "Should Congress be involved?" To which, much to the chagrin of the religious zealots who have perverted my beloved party into the Big Government-loving monster it is today, the VAST majority of Americans responded resoundingly "NO!" Whether they personally sided with the husband or the parents was not the issue - NO ONE with any sense wants Congress involved in such a deeply personal issue. And, in MY opinion, anyone who feels otherwise has NO business claiming to belong to the party which has always believed in minimal federal interference in personal affairs. (And now, let the invective begin .....)
I'm sorry this was your opus. You are missed.
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.