Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: UCANSEE2

I believe this is why Michael did not let Terry go:

Court testimony provided by members of the Schindler family included very personal statements about their desire and intention to ensure that Theresa remain alive . . . at any and all costs. Nearly gruesome examples were given, eliciting agreement by family members that in the event Theresa should contract diabetes and subsequent gangrene in each of her limbs, they would agree to amputate each limb and would then, were she to be diagnosed with heart disease, perform open-heart surgery. Within the testimony, as part of the hypothetical presented, Schindler family members stated that even if Theresa had told them of her intention to have artificial nutrition withdrawn, they would not do it.

That's beyond gruesome. And I'd expect my husband to make darned sure that never happened to me.


114 posted on 03/19/2005 11:08:54 AM PST by Peach (The Clintons pardoned more terrorists than they ever captured or killed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies ]


To: Peach
I am so sorry you see it that way. My parents spent their money to ensure I had the best care, and got any treatment that would help me. I was supposed to be dead, then I was supposed to be paralyzed for life, then I was supposed to be in so much pain if I stood upright that I could not take it. The doctors were wrong.

My parents wanted me to live, no matter what was 'wrong' with me. Any parent that would reject their offspring because it was 'damaged', are not Christian, not human, and not what I would want for parents.

Her parents want to keep her alive, no matter how much it costs or how much of their personal devotion, time it takes.

Michael wants to kill her no matter how much it costs, or how much time it takes.

Whose side did you wish to be on?

437 posted on 03/19/2005 2:36:12 PM PST by UCANSEE2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies ]

To: Peach

Can you provide me to a link of this court testimony?

I would like to read it for myself. So far your references and paraphrasing of other's statements has been very very shaky.


438 posted on 03/19/2005 2:38:53 PM PST by UCANSEE2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies ]

To: Peach
Nearly gruesome examples were given, eliciting agreement by family members that in the event Theresa should contract diabetes and subsequent gangrene in each of her limbs, they would agree to amputate each limb and would then, were she to be diagnosed with heart disease, perform open-heart surgery. Within the testimony, as part of the hypothetical presented, Schindler family members stated that even if Theresa had told them of her intention to have artificial nutrition withdrawn, they would not do it.

Speaking of gruesome, read a description of what it's like to be killed by dehydration and starvation and then see if you can still tell us that any sane person would wish to die in this gruesome way, and furthermore, actually request it.

And since when does amputation of limbs (a wholly fictional and hypothetical straw man put forward by Felos) give a judge the authority to order the starvation of a U.S. citizen?

Cordially,

507 posted on 03/19/2005 3:45:58 PM PST by Diamond
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson