Posted on 03/21/2005 7:50:03 AM PST by Pendragon_6
Lets see, first Michael Schiavo beats and strangles his wife Terri, leaves her lying unconscious on the floor until her family arrives to get her to the hospital.
Then Michael Schiavo sues the hospital for $20 million because he needs the money to get his poor wife therapy.
Then Michael Schiavo pockets the money, denies his wife the care he said she needed and finally, claims she really wants to die.
Michael Schiavo killed his wife Terri's cat, melted down her wedding ring and then took up with his girlfriend and lives with her today with their children. Does this sound like a loving husband who really cares about his wife's wishes?
And what do we get on the tube every hour on the hour: “persistent vegetative state” as though any of the talking heads who ghoulishly proclaim Terri's life isn't worth that of a convicted serial killer sitting on death row (for 20 years, while due process goes on).
Michael Schiavo's supporters claim he loved his wife Terri enough to take a nursing degree so that he could take care of her. I think he got that nursing degree so he could inject her with insulin and hasten her death and his complete claim to all the money he won in litigation.
Just take a gander at the sworn testimony of an attending nurse: Carla Sauer Iyer (affidavit* below) but let me save you some time and report a quote of Michael Schiavo's after visiting his still living wife: "When is that bitch gonna die?"
Hmmm. Loving husband or man so afraid of not only not getting the money (what's left of the $20 million) but the prospect of facing a jury for his attempted murder, a charge which is possible as long as Terri lives. Sounds like motive to me.
Michael Schiavo says Terri said she never wanted to be kept alive on machines. Okay. Even if that was her statement (which there is absolutely no corroborating testimony and quite the unusual statement coming from a young, newly married woman still in her twenties and full of life); Terri is not being kept alive by machines!
Terri has a feeding tube from which she gets food and water. Had she had the care and therapy she was entitled to, there is every chance today Terri would be divorced from that louse and feeding herself just fine.
About that “loving husband” crapola: what husband do you know evinces his marital fidelity and love by living with another woman, having children with that woman and dumps his wife in a hospice while waiting for her to die? What loving husband kills his sick wife's pet? What loving husband denies his wife's family visitation?
I ask these questions because the media morons are still stuck with their new term: “persistent vegetative state” and are oblivious to the actual facts of this tragic case.
Continued
No. Which raises the question of why MS wants so badly to retain control and see her dead.
Now you're getting personal.
Please, just use reason when disagreeing with me. The insunuations are unbecoming.
A lot things that have been considered inventions of moderns have been found to have been done by ancients. Don't know about feeding tubes specifically (just what century was that doctor with the Canadian trapper anyway?).
Thanks for the info on the pets and ring. Do you know when these events occurred? Not that it makes much difference I suppose, just curious is all.
That, was uncalled for. This is the type of thing that is not needed or wanted here.
"this case has been heard, again and again and again. let her rest and stop toruring her."
Letting her live isn't torture, dehydrating her to death is.
I'm not sure, but I think the pets' deaths were soon after the malpractice award. I have no idea on the date of the ring being melted, and MS probably did not give a date.
Well said.
First things first.
I've heard you use the words, essence, personality, and intolerance in a fashion that is very much like they are used by the MSM, and the lib left.
When I pointed out the likeness of your thoughts to those of Peter Singer, I thought it might just coincidental.
Are you truly an ethical relativist? If so, it would explain much about the tone of your postings.
Now, about whether I would accept *ADULTERY* as a legitimate outlet for Mr. Schiavo.
No. He could file for, and receive, a divorce from Terri in a NY minute if he chose. But he chose not. Therefore, he is in a legal quandary of his own making, and in a deep pit with regards to his moral standing. I do not sympathize with him at all, because it was his choice.
Feeding someone is not keeping them alive by artificial means. Depriving someone of food, water, air is murder. You go through a lot of long winded, bible thumping, medical explanation looking for a reason the allow murder. We should not be anxious to put someone to death (murder) because we think that their life is not worth living. Save that kind of rationalation for your own living will. Maybe you should consider prayer and reading the bible with comprehension
AMEN!!!
I am sorry to hear about your wife, and you did the right thing.
We need to face facts. Sometimes God’s answer is no regardless of how fervently we want otherwise. Let us all let her go so she may enjoy her rest with the Lord.
That sums it up pretty well. Thanks for a great post, you said it better than I could have.
Then I stand corrected.
You see, I'm simply not afraid to change my position provided the facts warrant.
However, I have seen some blatant and outright deceptions and lying on the part of those who support Terri's parents. Sifting through what is right and hauling on the carpet those who've been lying is incredibly hard. They simply don't seem to care that they will be exposed - for them, the end justifies the means.
As a conservative, it is difficult for me to side with the MSM and the Democrats, but in this instance; it appears they are actually right for a change.
Claiming all 11 courts are on a pro-death position really stretches the imagination. Why this case and not the others? Why the apparent legal conspiracy to *kill* this one woman and not any others? Where is the bloodbath from other cases?
See what I mean? It is absurd to think all 11 courts were out to *get* Terri by siding with her husband.
Did you upbraid your friend HMFIC when he said such things?
FR is a rough and tumble place. You gotta be able to take the good with the bad if you're going to spend any time here.
Yes, I understand. Personal attacks are entirely a different matter.
Proof?
"But you want to believe MS when he claims (after several Years) that his wife said she wanted to be starved to death?"
No, I have never said I believe MS. I have many serious doubts about statements he has allegedly made, and I'm not convinced he cares for Terri as much as he would like us to believe. However, I can also step back and admit that there are allegations being made on both sides of this issue that are not proven facts, and therefore not information I find worthy of basing an opinion on. I am one of those who simply believes that removing this woman's feeding tube is morally wrong given the circumstances.
Boy, don't I know it. The ironic thing is I don't have HPV and neither did she. She had adenocarcinoma instead of scamous.
Which is an interesting segue to your mis-statement regarding 11 courts. Can you please either give sources or list the 11 courts that you say are siding with her husband? It's mostly been Greer's court, who illegitimately serves as both judge and guardian ad litem.
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.