Posted on 03/24/2005 7:22:09 AM PST by ConservativeMan55
Edited on 03/24/2005 7:43:21 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
Why is it so hard to understand that some people don't believe exactly the same thing you do?
Do you follow every rule in the bible? Word for word? Or do you just throw out verses that suit your needs and then go home and live your life how you want to?
There is a lot of injustice in this world. I haven't seen this much posting activity over the violence in the Sudan. Why not? Why aren't you trying to get Congress to pass laws helping the people over there?
?????........ no response?
What is it about this case that makes you ignore the facts, falsely accuse everyone involved (unless you have some PROOF of wrongdoing that you'd like to share), and ask for federal involvement in a state matter?
This woman's life is precious but there are other things to consider.
I'm also pretty sure that in the bible it mentions something about the greatest thing a person can do is sacrifice their life to save another. This case will bring about sweeping changes in the law. It has already raised the publics awareness about how messed up the system is.
Good will come out of this. Maybe not the way YOU want it to, but it will.
According to Florida law, the way Terri is being fed and hydrated IS considered life support.
It seems you are throwing out verses you find interfere with your own views. That is normal when one wants to disagree with God.
Again, what is so difficult about Jesus saying to feed the hungry and provide drink for the thirsty? One does not need a theological degree to understand that.
But King George has decreed that ALL forms of nutrition and hydration be forbidden.
There is no other way for her to recieve food or water. Don't rely on hearsay, read the documents.
Her PVS was not disputed by her parents until after the malpractive lawsuit. It seems that they wanted to get some of the money for themselves.
//There is no other way for her to recieve food or water. Don't rely on hearsay, read the documents. //
The swallowing tests that were all done with the intent of determine whether it would be safer to feed the patient by mouth or with the tube. If feeding by mouth would pose significant risks, it would be contraindicated under such circumstances. On the other hand, when the only alternative is absolutely certain death, even if feeding by mouth had only a 1% chance of success, I see no legitimate reason for forbidding Terri that chance.
Addendum: I don't even see any plausible way in which forbidding such attempts is in Michael's interests, unless he knows it's likely Terri could swallow. After all, if the parents had tried to feed her and she choked, Michael would have been rid of his wife by now and would have deflected much of the blame.
Sorry - everyone on TV has been talking about the runaway congress - President - Jeb - that is who I thought you meant...Sorry!
No problem. MRN
America has "backsliden". That means chastiasment is on the way!
A heroic action for Jeb is to forgo his job, and risk contempt charges to do the right thing! Its not just one girl, but the whole corrupt system. He would emerge as a victor.
A heroic action for Jeb is to forgo his job, and risk contempt charges to do the right thing! Its not just one girl, but the whole corrupt system. He would emerge as a victor.
His job is not as important as saving a life from being murdered. He would come out as a hero!
"His job is not as important as saving a life from being murdered. He would come out as a hero!"
Nor is yours. Are you there at the hospice right now?
What are you talking about? It doesn't make sense.
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.