Posted on 02/23/2005 1:02:48 PM PST by Alissa
On the radio as breaking so far!
>But we live under laws.<
Remember, this is a country where, at one time, it was perfectly legal for one person to own another. It was legal to prohibit women from voting, and one segment of the population could not go into the restaurant of their choice to eat a meal.
Sometimes the law is wrong. Most of us on this thread believe this is one of those times.
You might enjoy reading Mark Levin's book, Men In Black. He outlines the problems with our judiciary beautifully.
I was referring to the oft cited DEATH WITH DIGNITY argument generally spouted by those like yourself in the Euthanasia camp.
I admit, living as a prisoner of your husband's (who is now living in a BEAUTIFUL home -which he bought with money he was to use for his your rehabilitation- ALONG with another woman by whom he has had two children) in a facility for terminally ill patients when you are NOT termially ill and WHICH IS NOT EQUIPPED FOR YOUR REHABILITATION (that you're husband and guardian won't ALLOW you to recieve), surely is not a dignified existence. How, if Terri were home being well cared for by her family and recieving the REHAILITATION and THERAPY she needs, would that be UNDIGNIFIED living?
>He appears to be in violation of the cohabitation and sodomy laws, although after the Supreme Court decision in Lawrence, those laws are almost certainly unconstitutional.<
Couldn't his cohabitation be considered a conflict of interest, as far as his suitability to make life and death decisions over his legal wife?
Any reasonable woman, married to a man in such an adulterous relationship, would not trust him with her life.
And further, Michael is not living with "dignity". After all, his relationship with his current partner is adulterous and he has two illegitimate children.
I know my comment will be mis-interpreted, but I'm hoping you will understand that I'm only addressing the timing issue with that response.
I think your second concern is simply getting too specific about a conversation which never occurred. It's incredibly unlikely that Terri ever said anything like "Don't keep me on a ventilator for 15 years, but feed me with a tube if I'm breathing on my own." Most people don't ever consider the difference.
Either she made some general assertion about being kept alive after being rendered completely disabled or she didn't. We only have the evidence from her spouse which isn't very credible after all that has transpired.
However, her parents haven't come up with any evidence that I'm aware of that disputes it, other than the assertion that Terri, as a Catholic, wouldn't have felt that way.
That's an incredibly weak argument in the courts, because we all know that Catholics don't have unanimous opinions on anything and deciding that an implication of what she should have believed as a Catholic is better evidence than what her husband testified that she said just isn't going to cut it.
I doubt whether Terri every indicated to anyone what her wishes would be in such a situation, and Michael is probably making it up. Perhaps not, but those kinds of tough issues are something a person in their mid-20s don't often consider or talk about.
Greer has a relative on the board of THAT Hospice. In fact, Felos may as well. All I know is that there are so many conflicts of interest in this case that Judge Greer, when asked to recuse himself from it, should have. This is one of the WORST cesspools of corruption that I have witnessed in such a wide open manner. And that sad fact is the result of this corruption is the MURDER of an INNOCENT girl. I give Governor Bush NO room for wiggling out of this one.
Good point. Well, then, Michael shold be starved along with his "wife."
That's "should."
It doesn't surprise me at all that Greer would DENY the DCA the opportunity to speak. He has denied the admission of each and every piece of evidence that is important to Terri's case. It's been a sham for years. He's a corrupt Judge and he needs to be impeached and removed.
"Pinellas Circuit Court Judge George Greer, who issued an emergency stay on Tuesday, extended that order for two more days on Wednesday, saying he needed more time to determine whether Michael Schiavo was fit to be Terri's guardian. "
I think THIS is the crux of the matter. The judge doesn't have to decide whether Terri should or should continue to be provided nourishment, he needs to decide, whether her current guardian does indeed have Terri's best interest at heart or not. The answer to that is obvious, of course.
Thanks for your answer...very good points. At most, Terri may have made an offhand comment, and it's likely Michael is making it up. The law that supports this nonsense needs to be repealed. Food and hydration should only be removed with an advanced directive...that is specific as to starvation/hydration. It is very disheartening that death row convicts have more appeals and rights and sympathy than people like Terri. I hope I have not been rude, I don't mean to be.
Please add me to your ping list. This case has really gotten to me...It seems like such a no-brainer, our courts do not have the right to put a value on human life and decide who lives and who dies. This case is very sad...my prayers are with Terri and her parents.
BTTT!
I'm not surprised, either, that he disallowed the DCF attorney to speak in open court. However, this does not mean that he can afford to ignore an investigation into abuse against Terri involving Michael Schiavo. It would be impossible for him to rule that Michael remain the Guardian who decides to kill Terri if Michael himself is being investigated. So Greer has got to find a face-saving way out of this situation. He can always claim that new information has come to his attention about Terri's potential to improve. Yeah, that's the ticket, Judge Greer. Better take it, before things get a lot hotter for you.
There is a big difference between being taken off a ventilator and allowed to start breathing on one's one or not, and having food and water withheld. Perhaps if Michael were to allow oral feeding, the situations might be somewhat analagous, but he refused to even have someone put a damp sponge to Terri's lips. Even Christ was allowed that.
Had Terri said in 1991 "...and if the legislature ever decides to allow starvation, do that too.", and if the evidence that she said it was incontrovertible, then making the law retroactive would be reasonable. But changing the law so as to reinterpret her intent is not.
Michael is not her former husband, he only acts that way because he is engaged to be married to one Jodi Centonze, with whom he has children. However, he will not divorce Terri, supposedly on the grounds that it means he and his 2nd wife cannot get married in the Catholic church. The real reason he won't divorce Terri is that he retains first rights as guardian over her, in front of her parents and siblings. He loves the control of not only Terri but her family as well. He loathes them, but they are really the nicest people you'll ever meet.
I believe the reason he is so insistent on murdering Terri is not because of some wedding vow he took, which is what he claims. That's got to be bogus because he already has a new family. Doesn't hold water. He is doing this because he hates her folks for trying to get guardianship away from him. He's doing this because they want their daughter to have the benefit of rehab therapy which he has denied, even though she was awarded $1.2 million for her care in a trust fund. Michael is a control freak.
Mass murders on death row have gotten more breaks than her.
________________________________________________________
You are sooo right! What is going here? Do they think that by murdering a helpless human being they will undermine the pro Life majority????
It's not going to happen...this latest outrage will be their last.
Sure, and that's one of the current avenues of appeal Terri's parents are pursuing. It's a WAY better argument than the religious liberty one which is practically exhausted.
There is?
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.