I suspect people like Burton eagerly grasp anything that supposedly supports their position--that individuals declared to be in a PVS are unresponsive—but question the science when it challenges the core of their argument. This is how the culture of death ALWAYS acts, they ignore anything that doesn't fit their agenda.
1 posted on
10/01/2007 3:49:47 PM PDT by
wagglebee
To: cgk; Coleus; cpforlife.org; narses; 8mmMauser
2 posted on
10/01/2007 3:50:35 PM PDT by
wagglebee
("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
To: 230FMJ; 49th; 50mm; 69ConvertibleFirebird; Aleighanne; Alexander Rubin; An American In Dairyland; ..
3 posted on
10/01/2007 3:51:04 PM PDT by
wagglebee
("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
To: BykrBayb; bjs1779; Sun; floriduh voter; MHGinTN; Mr. Silverback
4 posted on
10/01/2007 3:52:46 PM PDT by
wagglebee
("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
To: wagglebee
I continue to wonder why these type patients (and others), and their care costs, are not taken under the wing of research agencies.
It would seem to be a perfect way to match up continued life support with examination/research into causes, effects, and cures.
To: wagglebee
6 posted on
10/01/2007 4:15:22 PM PDT by
floriduh voter
(TERRI Anti-Euthanasia Ping List: 8mmmauser & I'm 4 DUNCAN HUNTER)
To: wagglebee
7 posted on
10/01/2007 4:22:49 PM PDT by
Cacique
(quos Deus vult perdere, prius dementat ( Islamia Delenda Est ))
To: Coleus; nickcarraway; narses; Mr. Silverback; Canticle_of_Deborah; TenthAmendmentChampion; ...
Pro-Life PING Please FreepMail me if you want on or off my Pro-Life Ping List.
9 posted on
10/01/2007 4:35:47 PM PDT by
cpforlife.org
(A Catholic Respect Life Curriculum is available at KnightsForLife.org)
To: wagglebee
Fred Plum's 1971 paper which coined the term "persistent vegetative state" was a speculative investigation of a certain type of head injury patient.
It was never intended to be put to the uses that legislatures and courts have crafted for it.
If it exists at all, it is a syndrome with varying causes and a diverse set of prognoses.
As a diagnostic category, it should probably be abolished, but it's too useful to politicians and judges for that to happen now.
10 posted on
10/01/2007 4:45:24 PM PDT by
Jim Noble
(Trails of troubles, roads of battle, paths of victory we shall walk.)
To: wagglebee
She died She was murdered because some saw her life as unworthy to be lived.
To: wagglebee
Lord, these people are still people. Help to convert the scients’ minds about this issue.
17 posted on
10/01/2007 6:03:23 PM PDT by
Salvation
(†With God all things are possible.†)
To: wagglebee
“Is this where we’re going? Are we going to declare that only individuals who are self-aware AND capable of making conscious decisions AND able to communicate these decisions with ease are worthy to live?”
The easy solution is to always err on the side of life. No problem.
18 posted on
10/01/2007 6:12:16 PM PDT by
Reddy
(VOTE CONSERVATIVE in '08!)
To: wagglebee
Burton has little use for the study....“There are plenty of questions about whether this young woman is conscious and capable of choice.”
So what if she isn’t? She’s a human being.
21 posted on
10/01/2007 8:40:51 PM PDT by
baa39
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson