[wagglebee]

You may certainly disagree, but artificially receiving food and water for several years with little hope of change, is not really living - if not unconscious, it could be a severe form of torture.

So, if she can be tortured, you acknowledge that her brain injuries probably weren't permanent?

You might want to decide these matters for others but I do not.

No, I think God alone should decide when and how we die. Denying a person food and water is little different than putting a bullet in their head.

[Gondring]

Serious question...not trying to be antagonistic with this, honestly...

No, I think God alone should decide when and how we die.

If God tries to take your life by possessing a deer to run out in front of you, do you not swerve?

[LaineyDee]

Denying a person food and water is little different than putting a bullet in their head.

I have to agree. I've spent the last 13yrs working with pediatrics... specifically "medically disabled" children. I can't tell you of ONE family in all those years ...who would have willingly stopped any of their feedings (they were tube fed) or considered their living life, "futile". Some of these children were profoundly retarded...some were quite capable of walking and talking... but every one of them responded positively to being held, touched, stimulated visually or spoken to in a kind manner.

Each child/person has their own level of conciousness... when brain injured...but the one thing that baffles science is the presence of a strong "spirit". It can't be measured with tools...it can only be observed and experienced.

I believe God has a purpose for creating each and every person, undetermined by mere man. To pick and choose who is worthy or unworthy of receiving medical care.... then trying to relieve our consciences by determining they were a "body in a bed anyway" or "usurping valuable resources", is treading thin ice IMHO.

Tell that to a Holy and Righteous God when you stand before Him upon judgement...(and we all will) when He was the one who told us "And whosoever shall give to drink unto one of these little ones a cup of cold water only in the name of a disciple, verily I say unto you, he shall in no wise lose his reward." /rant.

[goldstategop]

Exactly. It goes to the heart of our claim to be civilized beings. No one is allowed to treat an animal way. Yet we treated a human being with less consideration that we would a beast and the general attitude was have her die because she was a burden to her family - not all of her family of course but to her husband who forsook his marital vows and wanted his wife dead. Most people decided he had a right to have his wife killed when her usefulness to him ended. My view is admittedly a minority one but I find the notion morally unconscionable. Then again, I believe human life is sacred.

Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus

[SoldierDad]

Denying a person food and water is little different than putting a bullet in their head.

With respect to the eventual outcome, yes. But, depriving someone of food and water as opposed to shooting them in the head is much more grevious to the individual IMO. It takes a much longer time to die, and is probably much more painful as well.