Not when it comes though a feeding tube, they ask not to have it, and they live in Florida.
The ONLY issue in the Schiavo case, legally, is did she ask not to have it. People have testified in different ways on that question - none of us, AFAIK, heard any of those stories on cross-examination.
But, if she asked not to have it, it ain't murder - not even by the Vatican's definition.
You told me never to address you again. After this post, I will not address you again. Please leave me alone.
Vatican cardinal condemns starving death of Terri Schiavo
``When you deprive somebody of food and water, what else is it? Nothing else but murder,'' Martino said, adding that he was speaking on the case ``according to the teaching of the pope.'' The pontiff has spoken on behalf of providing food and water, even through artificial means, to patients like Schiavo.
Prior to her collapse, a feeding tube was not legally "life support," so even if she asked to be removed from life support, her request cannot be legally construed so as to unequivocally conclude that she wished removal of a feeding tube.
But, if she asked not to have it [feeding tube], it ain't murder - not even by the Vatican's definition.
I am quite sure you are mistaken on the Catholic church's position as well. It holds that facilitating a hastening of death by withholding basics that support life (food, water, air, shelter) even if it is the patient's wish, is morally wrong. Legal? Maybe. But a good argument can be made that Terri's demise was against the legislative intent expressed in the totality of Florida's Section 765.
When did she ask not to have a feeding tube? At the time she allegedly said she "wouldn't want to live like that" feeding tubes were not considered extraordinary means are artificial life support in the state of Florida. She made the statement after seeing M Schiavo's relative removed from life support consisting of a ventilator. It was not an informed decision.