Although I didn't go into the specifics, I suspect that getting the people to recognize that they can be "okay" even if their past actions aren't will be the key to unravelling abortion and euthenasia. I don't know how best to introduce the subject in Terri's case--it's rather too complex to put on a placard--but I suspect it is key. Many people are probably worried that if Terri's death isn't okay, that someone else's death in which they played a part would also then not be okay. Such people will feel compelled to promote Terri's death unless or until they can be helped to come to terms with their own past actions.
You hit the nail on the head with your post. I'm guessing that a lot of people who are rooting for Michael are trying to ease their own guilty consciences over what they may have done in the past with someone they've loved. Perhaps they fell for the lies of the euthanasia movement, but there's no need in perpetuating the lies. We've got to remind people that the only way to get over it is to come clean.
I had a discussion with someone who pulled the feeding tube of a parent. How do you explain he/she starved his/her parent???? I attempted to but it wasn't easy. Furthermore, that person was convinced the only reason people keep the tubes in, is to get the SS checks of their loved ones. That person made the same accusation of Nancy Reagan....now come on, with all her money did Nancy need Ronald Reagan's SS check? It's an argument that is completely irrational. But it' easier to believe such irrational arguments than to believe you starved a loved one.
Your point is an excellent one. It makes the war much tougher.