Freepers call to action re. Terri Schindler-Schiavo. Make a complaint against Judge Greer:

Florida Gov. Jeb Bush has asked a judge to delay setting a date for removal of a feeding tube sustaining the life of a brain-disabled woman, Terri Schindler-Schiavo.

Judge Greer will not appoint a guardian ad litem. I have phone numbers from the phone book for the Clearwater Courthouse and all the guardianship phone numbers. He husband held a presser today and was very flippant about Jeb's letter and called the emailers a "bunch of right to lifers."

Hubby is looking a little nervous but with a pal like Judge Greer who is no Judge Moore, Terri has until the September 11 hearing to decide the date her starvation begins.

Here are the phone numbers: courthouse - 727-464-3000, guardianship numbers: 727-582-7563, 727-582-7771, and 727-464-8700. We can at least call as friends of Terri and voice our concerns.

25 posted on 08/26/2003 7:34 PM EDT by floriduh voter

Freepers, please call the Juducial Qualification Commission regarding Judge Greer: 1-850-488-1581.

***

Contact friends, thank those have been fighting on Terri's behalf, including Glenn Beck, Lars Larson, CNS News.com, WND, and Bill O'Reilly.

*** Terri Schindler Schiavo's website - background and news updates: www.terrisfight.org ***

8 Terri Schiavo's website Media Contacts

Governor Jeb Bush (R)
Office of The Governor
Florida Capitol Building, PL-05
Tallahassee, FL 32399-0001
(850) 488-7146
(850) 488-4441
jeb.bush@myflorida.com

The Honorable(?) George W. Greer
6th Judicial Circuit
315 Court Street, Room 484
Clearwater, FL 33756
(727) 464-3933
ggreer@co.pinellas.fl.us

Attorney General Charlie Crist
Office of Attorney General
State of Florida
The Capitol
Tallahassee, FL 32399-1050
(850) 487-1963
Fax: (850) 487-2564
ag@oag.state.fl.us

It may even be that he and his family have been threatened in some way if he does not rule in Schiavo's favor

He does look haunted. When he says he has to follow the other court's directives maybe he is saying we should look at them.

4,881 posted on 09/20/2003 12:02:08 AM PDT by syriacus (Prankin' Al Franken....says he didn't lie to Ashcroft. His letter was only a prank. A Frankenprank?)

Are you telling me we need to bring in Gloria Alred, Johnny Cochran, etc. on this case right now?

If you are, I think you are right.
Will go for that tomorrow.
mark fuhrman, too.

Give me your input please right now.
Thanks
Fay

4,882 posted on 09/20/2003 12:13:10 AM PDT by yesnettv (We need to decide to save Terri's life. I did.)

Have they called Wesley and asked him for help?

There used to be a conservative legal group online that encouraged emails for pro bono work, I occasionally visited their site because they had homeschooling cases.

Something like Rockford Institute, but that's not it. It's Rock something, and it is either foundation or institute, I think.

How about that Martin Cruz, or whatever his name is, the prolife attorney. He is quoted in one of the writings about Terri.

If the court is the place where it will be decided, and if this is a matter which affects us all and especially the future of our children, then everyone should be helping. What can it hurt to ask?

4,883 posted on 09/20/2003 12:34:00 AM PDT by MarMema

To: Robert Drobot

Okay, we need to calm down here and backtrack to see where we got confused.
I've spent this entire evening trying to go back and get the timeline right. Combing through 4500+ posts with a 28K modem is not a lot of fun! It's time to upgrade to DSL!!

Robert, I'm going to try to answer your questions (and mine!)
Here goes:

You wrote: "In post 2538, pc93, without a reference, writes, "....Judge Lazzara took no action on Sept. 2 even after hearing all the facts....he now wants [the pleadings to be re-drawn to] be heard in 10 or 12 days."

Here's the story from WND of Sept. 3, about the federal hearing, with Lazzara giving the lawyers 10 days to try again:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=34399

You wrote:
"On Saturday, 13 Sept. I wrote in post 3594 about an AP story carried by WTSP, "Emergency hearing scheduled for Tuesday in Schiavo case". Terri's video is attached to the story for reader viewing. . The story says, "[Judge Richard Lazzara] has scheduled an emergency hearing for Tuesday ....". In that same post, I comment, "It's unfortunate at best that there's no mention of the Monday or Tuesday filings on terrisfight.org. " Further noting that the Terri website 'Timeline' only reflects actions "....through June of this year."

I BELIEVE that you might have been misled by the story at WTSP, about a new hearing for this past Tuesday. The "Emergency hearing" is simply the ORIGINAL federal hearing, on Sept. 2nd.
I've been searching and can find NO reference to any other "Emergency hearing"
There was only one hearing so far before Lazzara.

You wrote:
"There is no Lazzara "....Order...." on this thread."

You're right, there is no "Order" posted on Terri's site, or here on this thread, because there was no formal written "Order" from Lazzara AFTER he heard the complaint on Sept. 2.
As I understand it, Terri's lawyers first FILED the Amended Complaint on the preceeding SATURDAY, AUGUST 30, and then Lazzara issued an "Order" that same day to tell them to show up in court on Tuesday, Sept. 2, for a hearing.
When they argued the new complaint on Sept. 2, he just told them right there in court to go back and further amend it. I'm not aware of any written "Order". He just "ordered" them verbally to come back with a better pleading.
"Freeparoundtheclock" may also have been unsure of this in his replies to your posts.

The whole thing which somehow got so complicated on this thread is really very simple.
There was a hearing before Judge Lazzara on Sept. 2. That's the ONLY federal hearing so far that I've been able to discern.
There WILL BE another hearing very soon, if the timing is for Terri's side to have 10 days, and Felos to have 10 days to respond to their newly amended complaint.

I'm guessing this complaint has already been filed, and Felos is poring over it, looking for an advantage.
Why it's not posted anywhere, I don't know.
But I can imagine, that at this critical stage, the lawyers may not want any of the thousands of people on FR to be able to inadvertently give the other side any brilliant legal ideas. We have to remember that ANYONE with Interent access can read what's posted here on this Forum.
Don't put it past Felos to have a couple of paralegals lurking around checking out this thread!
These people are in the game "for all the marbles" and they are quite resourceful. And relentless.

One more thing. We may be Terri's friends, but we are NOT official parties to the legal proceedings on her behalf, and have no inherent right to have everything made available to us.
Especially at this most critical of times for the federal pleadings.
I'm not advocating censorship, just prudence.
There's a time for silence, and patience. I think that time is now.

Okay, I did find the #598, with a link to the Amended Complaint and Affidavits, AND the elusive "Order" by Judge Lazzara. The Order he signed on August 30, responding to the first Complaint.

Here's the link. This stuff was up on their front page at Terri's site, and is no longer on the front page, but still there.

http://www.terrisfight.org/fed.html

4,884 posted on 09/20/2003 1:03:56 AM PDT by Deo volente (God willing, Terri will live.)

I don't know. I tend to think this is just the court system and not Greer. Way back in 1984 in Florida there was a case where a husband was able to have his wife's feeding tube removed to cause her death. Corbett and something..

I doubt there is time to involve the IRS and I don't think that would have any influence on killing Terri. It's the federal judge, divine intervention, or bust.

Those of you who routinely attend religious services, could you please on Saturday contact your minister, rabbi, or priest, bring them abreast of what is going on and ask that they make what is going on with Terri part of their Sunday service.

Done. Did that last Sunday in fact.

4,885 posted on 09/20/2003 3:37:03 AM PDT by MarMema

But, who would have thought that a theoretic impartial judge, Greer, after hearing all the testimony would have ruled to murder Terri? Go figure?!

If you browse around some on the internet, though, you would have thought this. I just read, for instance, the ongoing report on Terri's case by Elder Law - and this is just one set of opinions out there. Greer, Felos, and Terri and her family are from unique or new.

It is to play well into the hands of our enemy to suggest that this case is about Greer or Felos being evil, even if they are, or to think that this same kind of killing isn't routine in this country already. The message here is about a cultural trend, which began and made great strides 10-20 years ago while we were all asleep at the wheel, perhaps. The question here is whether or not it is too late. There is not even the hint of concern in this bulletin summary as to whether or not the forced death they wish for will be humane, nor about Terri's suffering. She is non-existent for them already, even before they have killed her.

"10. Round Four of Florida's "Right-to-Die" Case -----------------------------

In this issue of the E-Bulletin, we wanted to update you about a recent “right to die” case and to discuss with you our thoughts about it. Long-time readers of the E-Bulletin will recall prior reports in the case of Terry Schiavo, the most recent being a summary in the June 17, 2003, issue of the E-Bulletin. The case, moving up and down the state appellate court system in West Central Florida, is on its fourth appellate opinion and all signs point to yet a further round of appeals as the ward’s parents and her husband/guardian continue to fight over the ward’s desires concerning life-prolonging medical treatment.

A brief recap to refresh your recollection. The husband/guardian petitioned the guardianship court for an order for withdrawal of the "feeding tube." The trial court entered an order for withdrawal of the tube. The parents objected and appealed. The Court of Appeals affirmed (Schiavo I). The feeding tube had been removed when the parents filed a separate civil action challenging the outcome and secured temporary injunctive relief that required the reinsertion of the feeding tube; the husband appealed, the injunction was dissolved and the matter returned to guardianship court (Schiavo II).

The parents filed multiple affidavits challenging not only the husband's testimony in the original trial but the diagnosis of persistent vegetative state and the ward’s prognosis. The Court of Appeals in its third opinion ruled that the challenges to husband's testimony did not justify a new trial, but that the parents had made a showing of a "colorable entitlement" to relief on the merits of medical diagnosis and prognosis. (The parents argued, among other things, that there was treatment that would improve the ward’s condition). In Schiavo III, the Court of Appeals directed that the parents and the husband each select two physicians and the trial court select a fifth; after medical reviews the trial court was to conduct a hearing limited to the question of whether the original prognosis and diagnosis were and remain accurate and whether the ward’s condition would remain the same. The parents had the burden of proving need to set aside the original judgment, but only by a preponderance of evidence. http://www.jud10.org/2ndDCA/oct01/2D01-3626.htm

Pursuant to that opinion, the trial court held 10 days’ of hearings on the experts' opinions regarding the ward’s condition, prognosis and diagnosis. Schiavo III required that the trial court find by a preponderance of the evidence that treatment proposed by the parents’ experts would offer a "significant promise of increased cognitive function" so as to substantially improve the ward’s quality of life. The trial court concluded that the parents failed to meet the burden of proof placed on them in Schiavo III.

As we predicted in the December 10, 2002, eBulletin, the parents appealed, and the Court of Appeals court recently issued Schiavo IV, where it once again affirmed the trial court, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the parents’ motion for relief from judgment. At this point, the ward has been in a vegetative state for 13 years.

In this fourth appellate opinion, the Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment of the trial court, declined to conduct a de novo review of the record and ordered the trial court to schedule a final hearing for the sole purpose of setting a date for removal of the feeding tube. A significant portion of this fourth opinion is devoted to a recap of the first three opinions and a review of the medical testimony. Although acknowledging that the appellate standard of review of the trial court’s order is abuse of discretion, the Court of Appeals examined all the evidence in the record, repeatedly reviewing the videotapes of the ward, the brain scans and the transcripts, concluding even if the standard of review were de novo, it would still affirm the trial court. The Court of Appeals gives us a glimpse into how difficult is the decision presented in a case like this:

Each of us, however, has our own family, our own loved ones, our own children. From our review of the videotapes of Mrs. Schiavo, despite the irrefutable evidence that her cerebral cortex has sustained the most severe of irreparable injuries, we understand why a parent who had raised and nurtured a child from conception would hold out hope that some level of cognitive function remained. If Mrs. Schiavo were our own daughter, we could not but hold to such a faith.
Schiavo IV at 10.

Despite that personal view, the court notes in cases where families can not reach agreement, the law provides that the trial judges act as the decision makers for removal of life-prolonging procedures. The judge makes the decision that the patient would make when there is clear and convincing evidence of that decision. “It is a thankless task, and one to be undertaken with care, objectivity, and a cautious legal standard designed to promote the value of life.” Id. Returning to its initial conclusion in Schiavo I, that the trial court had clear and convincing evidence, the Court of Appeals concludes that the evidence confirms the trial court’s initial decision and remands the case to the trial court to set another hearing, this one for entry of an order to schedule the feeding tube’s removal.

Full case: Guardianship of Schiavo
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District, June 6, 2003
http://www.2dca.org/opinion/June%2006,%202003/2D02-5394.pdf

Despite the appellate court’s remand “solely for the purpose of entering a new order scheduling the removal of the nutrition and hydration tube” Schiavo IV at 12, on July 25, 2003, the Court of Appeals entered a 30-day stay to give the parents time to file an appeal.
http://www.sptimes.com/2003/07/26/Tampabay/Two_plead_guilty_to_c.shtml

Although the parents intend to appeal to the Florida Supreme Court and are expected to appeal to the United States Supreme Court if unsuccessful before the Florida Supreme Court, both Courts have passed on previous appeals.

We asked Charlie Sabatino, former NAELA president and a nationally recognized expert on right-to-die issues for his comments about this case. Here’s what he had to say:

Theresa Marie Schindler was born on December 3, 1963, and lived with or near her parents in Pennsylvania until she married Michael Schiavo on November 10, 1984. Michael and Theresa moved to Florida in 1986. They were happily married and both were employed. On February 25, 1990, their lives changed. Theresa, age 27, suffered a cardiac arrest as a result of a potassium imbalance. Michael called 911, and Theresa was rushed to the hospital. She never regained consciousness. Since 1990, Theresa has lived in nursing homes with constant care. She is fed and hydrated by tubes. The staff changes her diapers regularly. She has had numerous health problems, but none have been life threatening? Theresa is in a permanent or persistent vegetative state. Schiavo I, 780 So.2d 176, 177 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

That is the factual starting point of the Schiavo saga, and nearly three years later, we all scratch our heads wondering how a case like this could have become the lead horse on an appellate court merry-go-round. By Schiavo IV, the parties were still arguing over whether the diagnosis was medically correct. What should we be doing in response?

Obviously, the case is a powerful testament to the need for every adult, especially younger adults, to do advance planning for health care decisions. However, even a properly drafted proxy directive does not guarantee that a proxy’s decision will not be challenged. This reality is illustrated by an ongoing case in Maryland, In re Sophia E. Foley, 373 Md. 627, 820 A.2d 587 (2003). In 1992, Sophia Foley, at age 52, was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s. While still competent, Sophia executed a health care power of attorney appointing her husband Michael to serve as her health care agent. There is no dispute about the validity of her directive or that she was competent at the time it was executed. In 1997, Sophia’s sister initiated a guardianship of the person proceeding, alleging, among other things, that her sister suffered from dementia resulting from Lyme disease. The sister argued that Sophia was not receiving adequate health care, because husband Michael failed and/or refused to have his wife tested for Lyme disease.

In the ensuing tangle of litigation, Michael did have his wife tested for Lyme disease (results negative) and re-evaluated for Alzheimer’s (results positive). His treatment plan for his wife -- supported by physicians -- is palliative care only. Yet, the sister has re-asserted in another petition that a new test for Lyme disease is more accurate than the one already utilized and that her sister’s condition might be improved if she were to obtain an accurate diagnosis and treatment. Meanwhile, she still resides at home with her husband and a daughter, in an advanced stage of Alzheimer’s

I think of the Foley and Schiavo cases as “cling-to-hope claims” that call into question whether state-of-the-art medicine was properly utilized. In other words, a family member challenges the medical basis of the proxy’s action, arguing that it is lacking, and that if the proxy had taken proper advantage of some allegedly state-of-the art diagnostic or treatment intervention, the patient’s condition or level of functioning would be materially better. Despite the outright fantastical claim in Foley that her dementia was caused by Lyme disease even after one round of tests ruled it out, courts are naturally reluctant to leave no stone unturned that might be hiding a magic pill. Yet the practical result is that it undermines the authority of one’s legitimate proxy and results in costly litigation, discovery, and parades of expert witnesses whose job it becomes to transform the judge into a judicial medical master.

These cases do not belong in court, but how can they be otherwise resolved? One part of the solution in long-term care settings is the establishment of regional long-term care ethics committees that provide the support, investigation, deliberation, and safe haven for family members to work through the difficult decision-making process in a non-adversarial forum. Examples of such committees include New Jersey’s Regional Long-Term Care Ethics Committees, the Kansas City Regional Long-Term Care Ethics Consortium, and the Long-Term Care Bioethics Consortium of the East Bay (Oakland, CA). Information about these committees can be found on the Last Acts web site at: http://www.lastacts.org/files/publications/SPC08LTC2.pdf

Still, well-functioning ethics committees don’t solve all problems, especially if the dispute revolves around diagnostic or cutting-edge treatment claims that pit centers of futuristic research and expertise against each other. Courts need to reaffirm their role as protectors of the process and not arbiters of state-of-the art medicine. Courts should steadfastly support the authority and discretion of proxies who have followed medically reasonable diagnostic and treatment advice. Interveners should have to show, not just that some medical resource might do better, but rather that the decision-making course of the proxy amounts to abuse or neglect. Schiavo IV is three Schiavo’s too many.

We also contacted Bill Colby, the lawyer who represented the family of Nancy Cruzan from trial through the U.S. Supreme Court, who echoed Sabatino’s sentiment:

"Like the Cruzan family, no one involved in Schiavo can win -- whatever the litigation outcome, the family will be left with a profound tragedy and sadness. If sharing their story can help others to act, that would be some good to come from such tragedy.

"Filling out an advance directive is important, but not enough. I agree that an advance directive likely would not have stopped the Schiavo litigation. But, what if Terry Schiavo, her parents and her husband had all talked one holiday about these questions, and then completed their directives?

"With the astounding demographics of the Baby Boomers, and the equally astounding advances in medical technology, a tsunami of hard decisions is straight ahead of all of us. What a gift we give to our loved ones if we spend some time now, when everyone is healthy, to have 'the talk,' and then fill out an advance directive. Do it at your next holiday gathering. And then go play Scrabble. To life!"

Bill Colby is the author of Long Goodbye: The Deaths of Nancy Cruzan (Nov. 2002), which is due out in paperback this October, with a new discussion guide for book clubs. He also has spoken at NAELA national and chapter programs.

We always recommend that clients make their wishes known about end of life procedures, even if the client wants all treatment at all costs (the wording of such a clause a subject of a recent thread on the NAELA list serve). We also advocate the importance of discussions amongst the client and the family, to increase the chances of the family members honoring the client’s wishes when the time comes to make a decision.

Of course, many clients are like Terry Schiavo, and have never put their wishes in writing, leaving the court to sift through testimony of conversations, life style, etc., to determine whether there is sufficient evidence of a patient’s wishes regarding the removal of life-prolonging procedures. Even when there is sufficient evidence, or even advance planning documents, there are no guarantees that there will be no litigation.

As revealed in this fourth appellate opinion, these cases are extremely difficult for all involved, and the decisions for the judges are complex and truly decisions of life and death. It is very likely that advance planning documents would not have prevented the litigation in this case, although we still believe that making one’s wishes known is the best chance of avoiding situations like those facing the parties in Schiavo. In fact, telling clients about the Schiavo case will graphically illustrate the importance of advance planning. And, unfortunately, we predict that we will once again be writing about the Schiavo case in a future issue of the E-Bulletin.

4,886 posted on 09/20/2003 4:15:12 AM PDT by MarMema

Good post Deo. Some of the same thoughts I had...

4,887 posted on 09/20/2003 4:56:18 AM PDT by MarMema

Has anone contacted Geraldo?

He made his reputation by exposing what was going on at Willowbrook.

4,888 posted on 09/20/2003 5:35:14 AM PDT by syriacus (Prankin' Al Franken....says he didn't lie to Ashcroft. His letter was only a prank. A Frankenprank?)

But I can imagine, that at this critical stage, the lawyers may not want any of the thousands [Last count is there are about 35 members of FR active on the Terri threads.] of people on FR to be able to inadvertently give the other side any brilliant legal ideas. We have to remember that ANYONE with [Internet] access can read what's posted here on this Forum. [That's the hope!!!] Don't put it past Felos to have a couple of paralegals lurking around checking out this thread! [So what???] These people are in the game "for all the marbles" and they are quite resourceful. And relentless.

One more thing. We may be Terri's friends, but we are NOT official parties to the legal proceedings on her behalf, and have no inherent right to have everything made available to us. [WRONG!!! Court filings are public record, available to anyone having the time to read them.] Especially at this most critical of times for the federal pleadings. I'm not advocating censorship, just prudence. There's a time for silence, and patience. I think that time is now. [Silence is keeping America unaware of the state ordered murder of an non-criminal, and you advocate further "....silence and patience...." in the failed hope the 'system' will do justice for Terri????]

Okay, I did find the #598 [What is that?], with a link to the Amended Complaint and Affidavits, AND the elusive "Order" by Judge Lazzara. The Order he signed on August 30, responding to the first Complaint. [ No you didn't.]

Here's the link. [This next sentence of yours in a classic double-speak, and needs to be read slowly for a good laugh.] This stuff was up on their front page at Terri's site, and is no longer on the front page, but still there [WOW!!! So you said it was, it isn't, but it is. NOT!!! There is no link of any kind to the page you reference below. That's a fact Jack. Nothing, zip, zero links on Terri's website to legal filings.] http://www.terrisfight.org/fed.html [So how did you gain access to this page - especially when it's not posted on any FR Terri thread, and unavailable on Terri's website???]

4,889 posted on 09/20/2003 5:41:57 AM PDT by Robert Drobot

To: syriacus; MarMema; yesnettv

Has anone contacted Geraldo? He made his reputation by exposing what was going on at Willowbrook.

Is the Thomas More Law Center involved in Terri's case?

Protecting the Sanctity of Human Life
We live in a culture where abortion is a daily tragedy and legalized euthanasia is a grim reality. For decades, our nation's courts have promoted a culture that undermines the sanctity of human life. The Thomas More Law Center affirms that all human life has intrinsic value. Our lawyers are committed to defending the unborn, the elderly, and the infirm.

4,890 posted on 09/20/2003 5:53:55 AM PDT by syriacus (Prankin' Al Franken....says he didn't lie to Ashcroft. His letter was only a prank. A Frankenprank?)

Refer a Case

The Thomas More Law Center is recognized by the IRS as a 501(c)3 public interest law firm. The Center is bound by its charter to accept only specific cases involving religious freedom, family values, and the sanctity of human life. The Center does not handle criminal cases.
The Thomas More Law Center limits the number of cases it handles at any one time. Therefore the acceptance or denial of your case is not intended to be a judgment on its legal merit. If you believe your liberties have been violated, and we are unable to assist you, please contact a private attorney.
Please provide the following information to help us review your case. Our case review board will evaluate the information you provide and a determination will be made whether the Law Center can assist you.

4,891 posted on 09/20/2003 5:57:25 AM PDT by syriacus (Prankin' Al Franken....says he didn't lie to Ashcroft. His letter was only a prank. A Frankenprank?)

To: Theodore R.; floriduh voter

"Was there ever any interest in trying to recall Greer?"

'Recall' had its' birth in early California. Some, but not all states have statutory provision for this procedure. I don't know about Florida's status, but our resident consultant on things 'Florida' seems to be floriduh voter. I would defer this question to him/her, and look to his/her response.

4,892 posted on 09/20/2003 6:00:29 AM PDT by Robert Drobot

Kudos to all of the volunteers in Anderson's office!!!

Because the volunteers, seemingly, don't make decisions like deleting court filings or adding court filings to the only source the public relies upon for information - filings that are available to Tampa and St Petersburg Citizens if they chose to visit the courthouse - my gripe is with the clowns who decided to shut-down the same information for America to read.

I've been civicly involved my entire life, and do very well appreciate the sacrifices a volunteer makes toward any social action.

More importantly, your efforts are not going unnoticed by a higher authority, and that is far more significant than any reward or recognition one might receive for their efforts in Terri's behalf in this temporal existence.

4,893 posted on 09/20/2003 6:20:00 AM PDT by Robert Drobot

FR thread about pro-life win this year by Thomas More Center...City settles suit about truck's graphic images

4,894 posted on 09/20/2003 6:52:47 AM PDT by syriacus (Prankin' Al Franken....says he didn't lie to Ashcroft. His letter was only a prank. A Frankenprank?)

Good find. Maybe they could send help.

4,895 posted on 09/20/2003 7:35:52 AM PDT by MarMema

To: syriacus; Deo volente

4,896 posted on 09/20/2003 7:54:38 AM PDT by MarMema

To: syriacus; Deo volente

Is there any evidence, in Terri's case, that the pro-abortion crowd is funding/supporting FeloSchiavo?

Both the pro-euthanasia and the pro-abort folks currently need to convince people that someone who looks very much like a human, is NOT a human.
Both groups need to convince people that it is okay to "cut the umbilical cord" on unborns (so to speak) and "cut the feeding tube" on disabled people.

Now that ultrasounds show that the pro-aborts' spin about a "blob of tissue" was a lie , pro-aborts will find it necessary to respin their fight for American hearts.

Now the pro-aborts will find it even more necessary to convince voters that

maybe the fetus looks like a human BUT
it doesn't have the mind of a human.

That sounds a lot like Felos' argument on O'Reilly the other night, when he said (something like). "Terri has no consciousness, so she should not be fed."

4,897 posted on 09/20/2003 7:58:33 AM PDT by syriacus (Prankin' Al Franken....says he didn't lie to Ashcroft. His letter was only a prank. A Frankenprank?)

What a great article!!

It's easy to read, AND covers the main points. Quite an accomplishment.

Thanks for posting the link.

4,898 posted on 09/20/2003 8:01:54 AM PDT by syriacus (Prankin' Al Franken....says he didn't lie to Ashcroft. His letter was only a prank. A Frankenprank?)

To: Robert Drobot

I have tried to make a lot of information available here:

http://bellsouthpwp.net/p/c/pc93/FedCourtDktCaseNo8_03-cv-1860-T-26TGW.txt

If there is anything at all that you would like me to include then please contact me at pc93@bellsouth.net

4,899 posted on 09/20/2003 8:30:20 AM PDT by pc93 (Terri is a human being. Judge Greer "I know that." Blood is on his hands & other elected officials)

Here is the info re: 60 minutes:

Good job, Miko! Here is their email address...perhaps if they are bombarded with emails that will also give them the push to get moving on this "story".

60Minutes@cbsnews.com

Take care, Cyndi

4,900 posted on 09/20/2003 8:46:12 AM PDT by pc93 (Terri is a human being. Judge Greer "I know that." Blood is on his hands & other elected officials)

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794