Posted on 09/21/2003 12:13:53 PM PDT by pc93
Terri's Call to Action Part 1 is over 5000 posts. If you don't want to get caught up to speed at Part 1:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/971896/posts?q=1&&page=5167#5167
Simply visit Terri's official web site at:
http://www.terrisfight.org
There are contact numbers at her web site for her core media team, legislators, media and for press updates.
See flash movies of Terri interacting with her mother, responding to a physician and see for yourself that she's not in PVS "persistant vegetative state").
In addition to access a text file with a lot of information see:
http://bellsouthpwp.net/p/c/pc93/FedCourtDktCaseNo8_03-cv-1860-T-26TGW.txt
If you want to join Terri's fight, it's important for us to CONTACT BUREAUCRATS, THE MEDIA and also your friends and family. It's up to you how you choose to Help Terri.
Pinellas Pasco Judge Greer set October 15, 2003 at 2:00 p.m. for her feeding tube to be removed. There's something wrong with Florida's exit protocols and the way the courts handle new information re: criminality (misrepresentation, attempted murder, etc.) affecting a case. There was no living will, only the assertion of a very suspect, so-called husband, his brother, etc. that Terri would not want to live on life support. Terri is not on life support, she is not comatose or PVS and she is not living "artificially". She does get sustenance from a feeding tube but only because she has been denied rehabilitation by her so-called husband after he won a malpratice lawsuit three years after her collapse (cause unknown but probably due to strangulation or physical abuse, or both) which is why Terri needs an army of supporters to spread her story from coast to coast. Terri has retained rights that are being sidestepped because she is disabled and has been denied rehabilitation! The technologies of rehabilitation have greatly improved exponentially yet Judge Greer has not let Terri have a chance to learn to eat or to be able to learn to speak/communicate again. Also new information bearing on the case which shows criminality on husband's side has not been considered by the 2nd District Court of Appeals who handed down Mandate for termination of Terri's feeding based upon testimony of criminal husband and brother as above stated. Who is next?
Let's make a difference! Thank you for your efforts.
And the exact beliefs vary by religion.
You are saying we should consider many, greatly varying theologies. That is a daunting task.
If you care to tell me the beliefs of the individual theologies about souls , I'd be willing to see what I can learn about them.
Since those religions disagree with one another, a "one size" answer to their concerns will not fit them all.
If you want a more general answer, right now, I'd say: Why the hurry to release the soul? Does it get reused right away? Does it attain bliss right away? Does "right away" even matter in the scheme of eternity?
Does "languishment" hurt the indestructible soul somehow?
Is a languishing soul trapped in time? Does that bother it? Or is the soul always part of the eternal sphere (wheel) , no matter where it is at?
I only brought up souls because right-to-diers are (pretend to be?) so concerned about souls.
Right-to-diers who make the news, like Nancy Cruzan's father and George Felos, talk about releasing the person/soul from their body.
It would likely be kinder to the patients if medical experts who are concerned with severely disabled patients, dealt with them primarily as physical persons and tried to help them in anyway they could and, perhaps, looked to the future with hope for a recovery.
It seems like some of them use the excuse of the soul to kill the body.
One of the underlying arguments of the right-to-diers seems to be
We can't make a "mistake" when we kill someone.""It's all right if we kill patients. It's all right if we err in killing patients. The patients' souls will "live on" or "be reincarnated" anyway....We can't make a mistake in killing them.
"Mrs. Wendland told the Times that doctors at Lodi Memorial Hospital informed her July 2 that her husband had an infection. One of his lungs collapsed July 8, and doctors were not able to drain all the fluid from it, according to the Times.
He was diagnosed with pneumonia, and was given antibiotics. When they did not work, Mrs. Wendland "made the decision that aggressive treatment was not in his interest, and he was kept comfortable," Lawrence Nelson, Mrs. Wendland's lawyer, told the Times.
Mrs. Wendland ordered that Robert's mother should not be told the details of her son's medical condition while he was suffering from pneumonia, the Times reported. According to the newspaper, the Superior Court in Stockton and the 3rd District Court of Appeal rejected Florence Wendland's emergency petitions to find out the details of his condition and to have Robert examined by a doctor of her choice.
Most people seem to agree that Terri is not biologically dead. If she were already dead, Felos and Schiavo would not be "prescribing" starvation to kill her. You don't need to starve a dead body.
True she requires liquid nourishment, but that nourishment is similar to what many folks take as a supplement. My daughter has taken it as a supplement. My mother takes it as a supplement.
Since people in the same condition as Terri are still alive, they probably do not need to have their souls released. Their souls probably belong in their bodies.
A momentous investigation into complaints alleging that (USA) disabled citizens were discriminated against and denied equal protection (including being deprived of medical help), was completed and released under the title of Medical Discrimination Against Children with Disabilities. One compelling case included in this report, bears a striking resemblance to baby Maartje. It involved a infant known as `Baby Jane Doe, whose future, if she survived surgery, was "unremittingly bleak". (14)
Baby Jane Doe's parents engaged in one of the most highly publicized litigated cases concerning a disabled infant. Upon advise from the infant's physicians, the parents decided not to have life- saving surgery done on the infant and the case went to trial. Baby Jane Doe was diagnosed with "spina bifida", having "fluid on the brain" [hydrocephalus]; "an abnormally small brain"; and was "so severely deformed that there is nothing that can be done for her." (15) Dr. George Newman, a pediatric neurologist, told the court that:
she is not likely to ever achieve any meaningful interaction with her environment, nor ever achieve any interpersonal relationships....develop any cognitive skills... whatsoever. (16)
The Los Angeles Times reported that "Doctors say that without surgery the girl may live up to two years; with it she could live until she is 40 but she would be severely retarded, epileptic and paralyzed from the waist down, as well as in constant pain"." (17) American bioethicist Arthur Caplan, also questioned the `quality of life' of Baby Jane Doe. In his article, "Is it a Life?", Caplan said:
No one should be forced by the government, [or] civil libertarians ... to live such a life, even briefly.(18) The court ruled in favor of the parents, and surgery was denied. An appeal was launched and a guardian ad litem was appointed. At conclusion, "the trial court judge ruled...It is clear...that the infant is in imminent danger, and that the infant has an independent right to survive; that right must be protected by the State acting the [parens] patriae, where a life is in jeopardy and the parents have elected to provide no surgical care...." (19) Nevertheless, that "decision ... was promptly overturned in the "States highest court, the New York Court of Appeals", who ruled:
There are overtones to this proceeding which we find distressing. Confronted with the anguish of the birth of a child with severe physical disorders, these parents, in consequence of judicial procedures for which there is no precedent or authority, have been subjected in the last two weeks to litigation through all three levels of our State's court system. We find no justification for resort to or entertainment of these proceedings. (20) However, in a surprising turn of events, the parents of Baby Jane Doe changed their minds and surgery followed - Baby Jane Doe had a shunt installed to close her back. Once her back was healed, "she was taken home." As she left the hospital, Dr. Newman had not changed his prognosis: "She will still be severely retarded and I still think, bedridden all the days of her life"." (21) By 1987, Baby Jane Doe (now known as Keri-Lynn), was not forgotten. It was said of Keri-Lynn when she was at age four "it is hard to recognize the pain-wracked, unaware, bedridden creature of her doctors' confident predictions...." (22 One reporter wrote:
Keri-Lynn talks and laughs; she smiles and hugs and screams and plants kisses firmly on a stranger's cheek. (23)
Charmed by her sweetness, another reporter wrote
...Later, she whispered, `Dance Daddy dance,' as her father swept her into his arms to sway to the music of Stevie Wonder. (24)
At the beginning of the chapter on Baby Jane Doe, contributors to this report referred to this case as not one to be "dismissed as isolated". Inaccurate prognosis can prove to be fatal. (25) The Baby Jane Doe case should lead us to somberly adjudicate the following:
In popular debate, the question whether children with disabilities should be denied lifesaving treatment has frequently been couched as though the issue were whether the government should intrude into matters of parental discretion. In fact, however, for decades the universally accepted law has been that when parents make treatment decisions that will undebatably lead to the death of their nondisabled children, the state will intervene to ensure the children's survival by mandating provision of life-saving medical care. It is only when the children have disabilities that the claim of parental autonomy is given serious sympathetic consideration. (26) (emphasis added) No one can argue that an infant cannot defend his or her right to life. Yet many are classified as subhuman (27) and "better off dead." Still not one physician has been convicted for these murders. (28) Doctor Leo Alexander said, (see below) "The beginnings at first were merely a subtle shift in emphasis in the basic attitude of the physicians. It started with the acceptance of the attitude, basic in the euthanasia movement, that there is such a thing as life not worthy to be lived."
This is from the CHN website. And so is my new quote, actually Cheryl sent it to me in an email. :-)
Just the other day, I was remembering the Baby Jane Doe case, and wondering how she fared.
Thanks for providing the answer to that question!!
Gee, I cannot agree that Felos is a moron. IMHO, he's a lot like a very sharp snake oil salesman and he is very skilled at using half-truths to communicate his distorted story of what is going on in cases like Terri's.
Half truths, like those Felos uses, are very useful as bait, to get unsuspecting listeners to swallow the huckster's whole line.
A soothing fog of half-truths has helped to put unsuspecting people, like Terri, in their precarious positions.
Felos is not the only deceiver involved in the "liberate-from-life" movement, but he's the example I have become most familiar with. (Incidentally, he happens to be the one that many others have been discussing here.)
People who come to this thread deserve to know what is going on with Terri. They deserve to know which lies are being propagated by specific right-to-diers who promote her dehydration.
Prove it.
But then, my asking you to substantiate your writing, is the very reason you have asked FreeRepublic.com members to isolate me from participation here.
You are what you write, floiduh voter.
May the hand of God touch you in ways unexpected today.
I think you are on to something!
Groups that "matter" somehow (or potentially have some "clout") are the groups that get ACLU representation.
Maybe some other people are not getting involved in Terri's case because they are afraid Terri's parents are going to "lose."
.....and the sheeple will follow your bell.
Care not that there is a sprinkling of posts containing unsubstantiated and over the line vanity that would make Jesse Jackson blush. By no means, take exception to that drivel. Rather, attack the one participant within the Terri threads who argues for reasoned thought and advises against capricious whole cloth opinions written as fact.
The American way? I don't think so.
But then, you know better, don't you.
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.