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]
Mod note: Calls for violence will result in suspensions
Michael Schiavo has filed a petition with the Supreme Court asking them to stay out of the case.
No. I did not and do not know Terri. I have no proof what her wishes would be, nor does anybody else. But, inferring from public testimony of Michael, Scott, Scott's wife, Terri's parents, Terri's siblings, and Terri's friends, I am not convinced to the standard of clear and convincing that Terri would choose suicide. I think the court errer on this factual determination. It may have also erred on the conclusion that she is PVS.
But you go right ahead and defend the legal process that is killing her.
So you accept the possibility. A small concession, but a crucial one.
Dont throw up your hands and say its all over, we are doomed. Nothing of the kind is true. Rather than telling me to explore my anal orifice you might want to try yanking your head out of yours.
You thoroughly disgust me. I did not say it was all over, but a negative precedent is being set. Secondly, I cannot believe you are so bloody happy when a young woman may be being painfully starved and dehydrated to death against her will and with the support of the offices of the law.
Your head is so far up your anal orifice that your brain cells are obviously starved of oxygen, and whatever centre of your brain that governed morality and a sense of justice is obviously dead.
Ivan
That is one of the fundamental problems I have with this case, because none of us can make good decisions in our own directives, when legal and medicial definitions continue to change.
They accuse me of being emotional and presuming to know what I can't possibly know. Despite the fact that I have their words as evidence that their thoughts would be torture in my mind. But they know what it's like to be Terri even though she hasn't spoken a full sentence for 15 years. Amazing!
Read it again.
Wrong. I am opposed to movement people like Randall Terry who ultimately care more about the fight than about making progress. He's there to gin up funding for his organization and no progress is acceptable unless it stops all abortions now which is not likely to happen. He speaks only to the people that are already on your side. He turns off any one else.
I'm against partial birth abortion, for parental notification, against someone other than a parent taking a child to get an abortion, against government financing of abortion or forcing those opposed to perform them. I accept abortion in cases of rape and incest. I also accept condoms as being better than an abortion.
Not hearsay, testimony.
Do YOU have better evidence?
No I think it was you that just agreed that Terri was worth more as a symbol in the war to stop all abortion than she is a person herself. Shame on you.
...and you are comfortable with someone being starved and dehydrated to death possibly against their will. And don't you dare try and suggest that you know her will. The point is that no one does - and the bias in that instance should be in favour of life.
Ivan
"The Governor has done everything he can legally do. Being Governor of a state is not a single-issue job. He tried his best to find a way to end this. He failed. The legislature did not act. The DCF is enjoined not to act.
A Governor may not act illegally, or he can count on losing his job. It's that simple. Vilifying Jeb Bush does nothing to advance any cause."
Just like I posted:
"Any of us freepers who have got balls realize that Jeb is showing the world he has none."
There was an article a few months back where an infant child (in a different country) put on artificial feeding because she was not able to eat. She was on that feeding tube until (if I recall) she was 8 years old, when her parents decided to bring her to the United States for testing to see what was wrong with her.
Diagnosis: NOTHING WAS WRONG WITH HER. Nobody had ever taken her off the feeding tube. SHE WAS ABLE TO SWALLOW ON HER OWN.
Terri has not been given significant opportunity to ever find out if she could eat on her own.
After all she is able to SWALLOW her own saliva. It is not running down her face and neck like JONATHAN ALTER (News Week) tried to make everybody believe when he said I wouldn't want to be a SLOBBERING IDIOT.
You don't KNOW what Terri wants. We have two conflicting statements. One from her husband who says she wants to die. One from her parents, who say she wants to live. The bias in such cases is being rewritten in favour of death, and by a very painful means - through forced starvation and dehydration. As has been said elsewhere, even death row inmates get more consideration.
You are comfortable with this? You think this is OK? Good God, why?
Ivan
What good does it do to have 500 representatives of the people make law when one unelected man can declare it null and void then proceed to craft and enforce his own without accountability?
Mine? My own eyes and the affadavits of three nurses. That's eyewitness testimony.
Laughing and smiling with dad.
No I'm not comfortable with this!
But there is no "bias" being rewritten, the existing law is being executed!
The law is finding in favor of Terri's guardian, and that's Michael.
We have executed innocent men in Florida's electric chair...do we now overturn the death sentence based on the REAL possibility of another innocent man being executed?
You couldn't have given a more satisfying response if you'd tried.
Are you comfortable turning over the right to make such intimate decisions on the life and death of your spouse or children to mob rule and politician?
It was satisfying.
When addressing me, include me.
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.