I think I'm an American citizen who's entitled to form the opinion that Michael Schiavo is a vicious, cruel cretin in thrall to bad philosophy. Who do you think you are?
It was ONLY after NOBODY could offer any hope that he gave up on her and decided to let her go.
Correction: he decided to kill her. He could have "let her go" at any time, and walked away. In his selfishness, he decided to kill her.
I am sick to death people judging this man with hysterical and meanspirited accusations.
What's your relation to him?
[And the fact is that evidence must be clear and convincing.] And the courts decided it was.
"courts" = Greer. And yes, that's what he decided. And he was wrong, which is why he is coming in for criticism. Understand now?
The law has always been that the spouse has the first word on decicions like this.
To quote a great debater, "You are wrong". The law has seldom allowed people to make a "decision" to kill their spouse.
If I am a vegetable and and water is all that is keeping me trapped in a such a miserable state of limbo, then by all means deny it. It's preferable to suffering years on end.
If one is a "vegetable" they cannot be "suffering". This was just one of the many glaring self-contradictions of the pro-killing faction.
The courts determined that this was Terri's wish per her husband's testimony...several times over many years. I don't know if they were right or wrong and neither do you.
Once again you use the plural "courts" to describe a single Judge.
You're right that neither I nor you know whether HE was right or wrong and that is the point. Absent clear and convincing evidence she should not have been killed, even under the bad law as it is written.
But with morphine to make sure it was painless, I would prefer this to years of being a vegatable with a tube stuck in me and needing people to wipe my butt everyday.
This is an autobiographical statement which has nothing to do with Terri Schiavo. Unless you are honestly saying that she needed to be killed to preserve what you imagine you "would want" in some low-probability hypothetical situation? Which would be astoundingly selfish on your part.
The medical experts said Terri's brain had liquified.
No they did not. Your understanding of the case appears to be very shallow and cartoonish. Had her "brain" "liquified" we wouldn't be talking about this, she would have been declared dead long ago.
I believe they can and do suffer in their soul being.
You "believe" that they "suffer in their soul being", eh? Is this the sort of objective, rational, law-based considerations that inform your view?
. I don't see any reason to keep a person here when they are just as much gone already. I don't see the point.
That much is clear. So when you "don't see the point" of not killing someone, why, let's just kill them. Got it!
Maintaining her in this state of limbo for years could very well have been more cruel than just letting her go now.
"could very well have been"? based on what? the "suffering in her soul being"? Yeah that's scientific.
Great responses in 602! So many of the kill-Terri contingent like to accuse the other side of undue emotionalism and rigid religiosity, but then they employ those very tactics. The biggest religious nut in this whole sordid affair is Felos. But I guess being some weird mix of newage/occultism is more acceptable than Christianity.
Once again you use the plural "courts" to describe a single Judge.
WRONG.
SIX seperate courts have heard this case.
Each one has determined "clear and convincing" evidence exists to show that Terri Schiavo would not want to continue her current course of treatment. This is not a new case. It has taken many years—and many courts—to reach this point.
If one is a "vegetable" they cannot be "suffering". This was just one of the many glaring self-contradictions of the pro-killing faction.
What a load of BS.
The idea that being in a vegetative state of existence involves NO SUFFERING on ANY LEVEL, that a person is just fine with it..is absolutely absurd.
And you degrade yourself with shameful statements like the "pro-killing faction".
People have to make painful decisions all the time when it comes letting a loved one go..it's hard enough without your brand of misguided fanatical name-calling and accusations.
To quote a great debater, "You are wrong". The law has seldom allowed people to make a "decision" to kill their spouse.
Incredible.
You really need to educate yourself when it comes to this subject.
Spouses make life and death decisions when it comes to medical treatment for their partners ALL THE TIME.
It is the law.
No less than SIX courts have decided that Terri's husband had the right to make this decision for her.
You know the law better than they do?