Posted on 01/29/2006 10:06:22 AM PST by NormsRevenge
Okay, then. Are you for natural death or assisted suicide? Anything other than natural death falls into the latter category.
Before modern medicine her heart attack would of killed her.
Jolly right.
Courts can be wrong.
In 1894, French Captain Alfred Dreyfus was tried for high treason and sentenced to life imprisonment in total isolation on Devil’s Island, off the coast of the peal colony of French Guiana. It took many years for the truth to be known.Dreyfus was totally innocent of the crime and false evidences had been used to convict him.
I go by the dictionary definition that represents thousands of years of accepted tradition. What definition do you go by? Hospices' and the right to die's cabal? A definition that is defined by one's personal or organization's definition?
from Merriam Webster's definition of life:
- a. the quality that distinguishes a vital and functional being from a dead body b : a principle or force that is considered to underlie the distinctive quality of animate beings,
I thought it turned out that she didn't have a heart attack (according to tests that were administered.)
Terri didn't have a heart attack.
Leave my life alone. That's all I ask. You can do whatever the hell you want with yours, but don't you dare come intruding on mine.
That should help you understand who I am.
Have a good evening.
Well, than I suggest you don't commit suicide. What's that gotta do with anything?
I think that both of you are correct, in that, the matter of end of life issues, is much larger than the case of Terri Shiavo...one reason being, that there is even immense disagreement as to whether Terri was at the end of her life, or not...whether she was cognizant or not...whether she was in a PVS or not...the disagreements could go on indefinitely, which is shown by how long these threads have gone on...
But the matter of end of life issues, aside from Terri Shiavo is interesting...in my own case, both of my parents, at the end of their life, wanted nothing done for them...no vents, no feeding tubes, no CPR, no extraordinary means(and for each person, the term, 'extraordinary' means is defined differently...in my parents case, what they meant, spelled out in writting, that nothing, absolutely nothing was to be done for them at the end of their lives, short of pain meds to keep them comfortable, should they need them...
Yet, on FR, I have been called an 'accomplice to murder', because I refused to forcibly, and against their will, to have a feeding tube, surgically inserted into them...when my dad was cognizant enough to refuse having a feeding tube, one of his own doctors tried to force me to override his wishes, and force him to have a feeding tube inserted...I sent that particular doctor off the case, as it became obvious, that he was trying to force his 'religious' view on my father, rather than respecting my dads own wishes for his last few weeks of life...my dad was going to die within a few weeks, and he had ceased to eat much....he ate and drank when he felt like it...and when he chose, he refused to eat and drink...this doctor was not satisfied with my dads own wishes, and so he sought to coerce both my father and myself...
My dad had a right to die as he chose....it was even in writing...I had a duty to abide by his wishes...this doctor thought his wishes were above everyone elses, and he sought to have his wishes carried out...But here on FR, there were some who chastized me for my actions, called me an 'accomplice to murder', and said that I was wrong, that I should have forced my dad to have a surgery he did not want, to insert the feeding tube, and that he should be fed against his will...
My dad died as he wished...he was not force to endure an unwanted surgery, he was not force fed, and he received enough pain meds to sustain him in a relatively pain free environment, until his moment of death came...
Now, granted, everyone who saw my dad in the last stages of cancer, understood that certainly he was at the end of his life....I see no such agreement on Terri Shiavos state...people are all over the place on just exactly what her medical status was...some experts say one thing, other experts say another thing...
But this issue certainly is much more than just the case of Terri Shiavo, and it is an issue which all of us have to face one of these days...possibly for our loved ones, certainly for ourselves..
I myself, as well as my husband, have already decided what we do and do not want...our sole remaining son knows our wishes as well...I certainly dont want the govt. barging into my family decisions on this, one of the most important issues of our lives..
I always appreciate your point of view.
I agree.
Everyone agrees Terri was not dying.
If she was dying, Michael Felos, and Greer would not have needed to kill her.
Thanks...sometimes I wonder if its wise to post this, but would like to try to get the conversation onto the whole general topic of end of life issues, rather than dwelling only on the Terri Shiavo case, as all of us will face end of life issues sooner or later...and as I just entered my 60s not that long ago, my end of life issues will be coming up sooner, rather than later, and its something I do ponder...
Well, we'll keep tryin' to widen the subject.
I agree it's vitally important.
I understand what you are saying...but what I am asking, must every single discussion about end of life issues, dwell on Terri Schiavo?..Is it possible to discuss end of life issues, without talking about Terri Schiavo?
See my post #258...I asked a direct question....I will ask it again...can we discuss end of life issues, without necessarily talking about Terri Shiavo?
I believe it.
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.